rn 


11 


Count  Leo  Tolsto! 


Cibrarjp  of  tlreolojical  ^emmarjp 

PRINCETON  • NEW  JERSEY 


PRESENTED  BY 

The  Estate  of  the 
Rev,  John  B,  Wiedlnger 


“THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  IS 
WITHIN  YOU  ” 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


https://archive.org/details/kingdomofgodiswi00tols_1 


‘THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  IS 
WITHIN  YOU” 


CHTilSTMNITY  NOT  AS  A MYSTIC  %ELIGION 
BUT  AS  A NEIV  THEOTiY  OF  LIFE 


TRANSLATED  FROM  THE  RUSSIAN  OF 

COUNT  LEO  'TOLSTOI 


BY 

CONSTANCE  GARNETT 


NEW  YORK 

THE  CASSELL  PUBLISHING  CO. 

31  East  17TH  St.  (Union  Square) 


Copyright,  1894,  by 

THE  CASSELL  PUBLISHING  CO. 


A/i  rights  reserved. 


THE  MERSHON  COMPANY  PRESS, 
RAHWAY,  N.  J. 


TRANSLATOR’S  PREFACE. 


The  book  I have  had  the  privilege  of  translating  is, 
undoubtedly,  one  of  the  most  remarkable  studies  of  the 
social  and  psychological  condition  of  the  modern  world 
which  has  appeared  in  Europe  for  many  years,  and  its 
influence  is  sure  to  be  lasting  and  far  reaching.  Tolstoi’s 
genius  is  beyond  dispute.  The  verdict  of  the  civilized 
world  has  pronounced  him  as  perhaps  the  greatest  novelist 
of  our  generation.  But  the  philosophical  and  religious 
works  of  his  later  years  have  met  with  a somewhat 
indifferent  reception.  They  have  been  much  talked  about, 
simply  because  they  were  his  work,  but,  as  Tolstoi  himself 
complains,  they  have  never  been  seriously  discussed.  I 
hardly  think  that  he  will  have  to  repeat  the  complaint  in 
regard  to  the  present  volume.  One  may  disagree  with  his 
views,  but  no  one  can  seriously  deny  the  originality,  bold- 
ness, and  depth  of  the  social  conception  which  he  develops 
with  such  powerful  logic.  The  novelist  has  shown  in  this 
book  the  religious  fervor  and  spiritual  insight  of  the 
prophet  ; yet  one  is  pleased  to  recognize  that  the  artist  is 
not  wholly  lost  in  the  thinker.  The  subtle  intuitive  per- 
ception of  the  psychological  basis  of  the  social  position, 
the  analysis  of  the  frame  of  mind  of  oppressors  and 
oppressed,  and  of  the  intoxication  of  Authority  and  Servility, 
as  well  as  the  purely  descriptive  passages  in  the  last  chap- 
ter— these  could  only  have  come  from  the  author  of  “ War 
and  Peace.” 

The  book  will  surely  give  all  classes  of  readers  much  to 


VI 


TRANSLATOR'S  PREFACE. 


think  of,  and  must  call  forth  much  criticism.  It  must  be 
refuted  by  those  who  disapprove  of  its  teaching,  if  they  do 
not  want  it  to  have  great  influence. 

One  cannot  of  course  anticipate  that  English  people, 
slow  as  they  are  to  be  influenced  by  ideas,  and  instinctively 
distrustful  of  all  that  is  logical,  will  take  a leap  in  the  dark 
and  attempt  to  put  Tolstoi’s  theory  of  life  into  practice. 
But  one  may  at  least  be  sure  that  his  destructive  criticism 
of  the  present  social  and  political  regime  will  become  a 
powerful  force  in  the  work  of  disintegration  and  social 
reconstruction  which  is  going  on  around  us.  Many  earnest 
thinkers  who,  like  Tolstoi,  are  struggling  to  find  their  way 
out  of  the  contradictions  of  our  social  order  will  hail  him 
as  their  spiritual  guide.  The  individuality  of  the  author  is 
felt  in  every  line  of  his  work,  and  even  the  most  prejudiced 
cannot  resist  the  fascination  of  his  genuineness,  sincerity, 
and  profound  earnestness.  Whatever  comes  from  a heart 
such  as  his,  swelling  with  anger  and  pity  at  the  sufferings 
of  humanity,  cannot  fail  to  reach  the  hearts  of  others.  No 
reader  can  put  down  the  book  without  feeling  himself 
better  and  more  truth-loving  for  having  read  it. 

Many  readers  may  be  disappointed  with  the  opening 
chapters  of  the  book.  Tolstoi  disdains  all  attempt  to  cap- 
tivate the  reader.  He  begins  by  laying  what  he  considers 
to  be  the  logical  foundation  of  his  doctrines,  stringing  to- 
gether quotations  from  little-known  theological  writers,  and 
he  keeps  his  own  incisive  logic  for  the  later  part  of  the  book. 

One  word  as  to  the  translation.  Tolstoi’s  style  in  his 
religious  and  philosophical  works  differs  considerably  from 
that  of  his  novels.  He  no  longer  cares  about  the  form  of 
his  work,  and  his  style  is  often  slipshod,  involved,  and  dif- 
fuse. It  has  been  my  aim  to  give  a faithful  reproduction 
of  the  original. 

Constance  Garnett. 

January,  1894. 


PREFACE. 


In  the  year  1884  I wrote  a book  under  the  title  “What 
I Believe,”  in  which  I did  in  fact  make  a sincere  statement 
of  my  beliefs. 

In  affirming  my  belief  in  Christ’s  teaching,  I could  not 
help  explaining  why  I do  not  believe,  and  consider  as 
mistaken,  the  Church’s  doctrine,  which  is  usually  called 
Christianity. 

Among  the  many  points  in  which  this  doctrine  falls  short 
of  the  doctrine  of  Christ  I pointed  out  as  the  principal 
one  the  absence  of  any  commandment  of  non-resistance 
to  evil  by  force.  The  perversion  of  Christ’s  teaching  by 
the  teaching  of  the  Church  is  more  clearly  apparent  in  this 
than  in  any  other  point  of  difference. 

I know — as  we  all  do — very  little  of  the  practice  and  the 
spoken  and  written  doctrine  of  former  times  on  the  sub- 
ject of  non-resistance  to  evil.  I knew  what  had  been  said 
on  the  subject  by  the  fathers  of  the  Church — Origen, 
Tertullian,  and  others — I knew  too  of  the  existence  of 
some  so-called  sects  of  Mennonites,  Herrnhuters,  and 
Quakers,  who  do  not  allow  a Christian  the  use  of  weapons, 
and  do  not  enter  military  service  ; but  I knew  little  of 
what  had  been  done  by  these  so-called  sects  toward 
expounding  the  question. 

My  book  was,  as  I had  anticipated,  suppressed  by  the 
Russian  censorship  ; but  partly  owing  to  my  literary 
reputation,  partly  because  the  book  had  excited  people’s 
curiosity,  it  circulated  in  manuscript  and  in  lithographed 

vii 


Vlll 


PREFACE. 


copies  in  Russia  and  through  translations  abroad,  and  it 
evoked,  on  one  side,  from  those  who  shared  my-  con- 
victions,  a series  of  essays  with  a great  deal  of  informa- 
tion on  the  subject,  on  the  other  side  a series  of  criticisms 
on  the  principles  laid  down  in  my  book. 

A great  deal  was  made  clear  to  me  by  both  hostile  and 
sympathetic  criticism,  and  also  by  the  historical  events 
of  late  years ; and  I was  led  to  fresh  results  and  con- 
clusions, which  I wish  now  to  expound. 

First  I will  speak  of  the  information  I received  on  the 
history  of  the  question  of  non-resistance  to  evil  ; then  of 
the  views  of  this  question  maintained  by  spiritual  critics, 
that  is,  by  professed  believers  in  the  Christain  religion, 
and  also  by  temporal  ones,  that  is,  those  who  do  not  profess 
the  Christian  religion  ; and  lastly  I will  speak  of  the  con- 
clusions to  which  I have  been  brought  by  all  this  in  the 
light  of  the  historical  events  of  late  years. 

L.  Tolstoi. 

YasnaIa  Poliana, 

May  14/26,  1893. 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  PAGE 

I.  The  Doctrine  of  Non-resistance  to  Evil  by  Force 
HAS  been  Professed  by  a Minority  of  Men  from 
THE  Very  P'oundation  of  Christianity,  . . i 

II.  Criticisms  of  the  Doctrine  of  Non-resistance  to 
Evil  by  Force  on  the  Part  of  Believers  and  of 
Unbelievers, 29 

III.  Christianity  Misunderstood  by  Believers,  . . 48 

IV.  Christianity  Misunderstood  by  Men  of  Science,  . 85 

V.  Contradiction  Between  our  Life  and  our  Christian 

Conscience, 109 

VI.  Attitude  of  Men  of  the  Present  Day  to  War,  . 133 

VII.  Significance  of  Compulsory  Service,  . . .164 

VIII.  Doctrine  of  Non-resistance  to  Evil  by  Force  Must 
Inevitably  be  Accepted  by  Men  of  the  Present 

Day 184 

IX.  The  Acceptance  of  the  Christian  Conception  of 
Life  will  Emancipate  Men  from  the  Miseries 

OF  OUR  Pagan  Life, 208 

X.  Evil  Cannot  be  Suppressed  by  the  Physical  Force 
OF  THE  Government — The  Moral  Progress  of 
Humanity  is  Brought  About  not  only  by  Indi- 
vidual Recognition  of  the  Truth,  but  Also 
Through  the  Establishment  of  a Public  Opinion,  235 

ix 


X 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER 

XI. 


XII. 


The  Christian  Conception  of  Life  has  Already 
Arisen  in  our  Society,  and  will  Infallibly  Put 
AN  End  to  the  Present  Organization  of  our  Life 
Based  on  Force — When  That  Will  Bf,  . . 264 

Conclusion  — Repent  Ye,  for  the  Kingdom  of 


Heaven  is  at  Hand, 


279 


“ Ye  shall  know  the  truth,  and  the  truth  shall  make  you 
free.” — John  viii.  32. 

“ Fear  not  them  which  kill  the  body,  but  are  not  able 
to  kill  the  soul ; but  rather  fear  him  which  is  able  to 
destroy  both  soul  and  body  in  hell.” — jMatt.  x.  28. 

“Ye  have  been  bought  with  a price  ; be  not  ye  the 
servants  of  men.” — i COR.  vii.  23. 


“THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  IS 


WITHIN  YOU.” 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  DOCTRINE  OF  NON-RESISTANCE  TO  EVIL  BY  FORCE  HAS 
BEEN  PROFESSED  BY  A MINORITY  OF  MEN  FROM  THE  VERY 
FOUNDATION  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

Of  the  Book  “What  I Believe” — The  Correspondence  Evoked  by  it — 
Letters  from  Quakers — Garrison’s  Declaration — Adin  Ballou,  his 
Works,  his  Catechism — Helchitsky’s  “ Net  of  F'aith” — The  Attitude 
of  the  World  to  Works  Elucidating  Christ’s  Teaching — Dymond’s 
Book  “On  War” — Musser’s  “ Non-resistance  Asserted” — Attitude  of 
the  Government  in  i8i8  to  Men  who  Refused  to  Serve  in  the  Army — 
Hostile  Attitude  of  Governments  Generally  and  of  Liberals  to  Those 
who  Refuse  to  Assist  in  Acts  of  State  Violence,  and  their  Conscious 
Efforts  to  Silence  and  Suppress  these  Manifestations  of  Christian 
Non-resistance. 

Among  the  first  responses  called  forth  by  my  book  were 
some  letters  from  American  Quakers.  In  these  letters, 
expressing  their  sympathy  with  my  views  on  the  unlawful- 
ness for  a Christian  of  war  and  the  use  of  force  of  any 
kind,  the  Quakers  gave  me  details  of  their  own  so-called 
sect,  which  for  more  than  two  hundred  years  has  actually 
professed  the  teaching  of  Christ  on  non-resistance  to  evil 
by  force,  and  does  not  make  use  of  weapons  in  self-defense. 
The  Quakers  sent  me  also  their  pamphlets,  journals,  and 
books,  from  which  I learnt  how  they  had,  years  ago,  es- 


2 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


tablished  beyond  doubt  the  duty  for  a Christian  of  fulfill- 
ing the  command  of  non-resistance  to  evil  by  force,  and 
had  exposed  the  error  of  the  Church’s  teaching  in  allow- 
ing war  and  capital  punishment. 

In  a whole  series  of  arguments  and  texts  showing  that 
war — that  is,  the  wounding  and  killing  of  men — is  incon- 
sistent with  a religion  founded  on  peace  and  good  will 
toward  men,  the  Quakers  maintain  and  prove  that  nothing 
has  contributed  so  much  to  the  obscuring  of  Christian 
truth  in  the  eyes  of  the  heathen,  and  has  hindered  so  much 
the  diffusion  of  Christianity  through  the  world,  as  the  disre- 
gard of  this  command  by  men  calling  themselves  Christians, 
and  the  permission  of  war  and  violence  to  Christians. 

“ Christ’s  teaching,  which  came  to  be  known  to  men, 
not  by  means  of  violence  and  the  sword,”  they  say,  “ but 
by  means  of  non-resistance  to  evil,  gentleness,  meekness, 
and  peaceableness,  can  only  be  diffused  through  the  world 
by  the  example  of  peace,  harmony,  and  love  among  its 
followers.” 

“ A Christian,  according  to  the  teaching  of  God  him- 
self, can  act  only  peaceably  toward  all  men,  and  therefore 
there  can  be  no  authority  able  to  force  the  Christian  to  act 
in  opposition  to  the  teaching  of  God  and  to  the  principal 
virtue  of  the  Christian  in  his  relation  with  his  neighbors.” 

“ The  law  of  state  necessity,”  they  say,  “ can  force 
only  those  to  change  the  law  of  God  who,  for  the  sake  of 
earthly  gains,  try  to  reconcile  the  irreconcilable  ; but  for  a 
Christian  who  sincerely  believes  that  following  Christ’s 
teaching  will  give  him  salvation,  such  considerations  of 
state  can  have  no  force.” 

Further  acquaintance  with  the  labors  of  the  Quakers 
and  their  works — with  Fox,  Penn,  and  especially  the  work 
of  Dymond  (published  in  1827) — showed  me  not  only  that 
the  impossibility  of  reconciling  Christianity  with  force  and 
war  had  been  recognized  long,  long  ago,  but  that  this  irrec- 


IS  WITHm  YOU." 


3 


oncilability  had  been  long  ago  proved  so  clearly  and  so 
indubitably  that  one  could  only  wonder  how  this  impossible 
reconciliation  of  Christian  teaching  with  the  use  of  force, 
which  has  been,  and  is  still,  preached  in  the  churches, 
could  have  been  maintained  in  spite  of  it. 

In  addition  to  what  I learned  from  the  Quakers  I 
received  about  the  same  time,  also  from  America,  some 
information  on  the  subject  from  a source  perfectly  distinct 
and  previously  unknown  to  me. 

The  son  of  William  Lloyd  Garrison,  the  famous  champion 
of  the  emancipation  of  the  negroes,  wrote  to  me  that  he 
had  read  my  book,  in  which  he  found  ideas  similar  to  those 
expressed  by  his  father  in  the  year  1838,  and  that,  thinking 
it  would  be  interesting  to  me  to  know  this,  he  sent  me  a 
declaration  or  proclamation  of  “ non-resistance  ” drawn 
up  by  his  father  nearly  fifty  years  ago. 

This  declaration  came  about  under  the  following  cir- 
cumstances ; William  Lloyd  Garrison  took  part  in  a dis- 
cussion on  the  means  of  suppressing  war  in  the  Society  for 
the  Establishment  of  Peace  among  Men,  which  existed  in 
1838  in  America.  He  came  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
establishment  of  universal  peace  can  only  be  founded  on 
the  open  profession  of  the  doctrine  of  non-resistance  to 
evil  by  violence  (Matt.  v.  39),  in  its  full  significance,  as 
understood  by  the  Quakers,  with  whom  Garrison  happened 
to  be  on  friendly  relations.  Having  come  to  this  conclu- 
sion, Garrison  thereupon  composed  and  laid  before  the 
society  a declaration,  which  was  signed  at  the  time — in 
1838 — by  many  members. 

“ DECLARATION  OF  SENTIMENTS  ADOPTED  BY  THE 
PEACE  CONVENTION. 

“ Boston,  1838. 

“ We,  the  undersigned,  regard  it  as  due  to  ourselves,  to 
the  cause  which  we  love,  to  the  country  in  which  we  live. 


4 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


to  publish  a declaration  expressive  of  the  purposes  we  aim 
to  accomplish  and  the  measures  we  shall  adopt  to  carry 
forward  the  work  of  peaceful  universal  reformation. 

“ We  do  not  acknowledge  allegiance  to  any  human  gov- 
ernment. We  recognize  but  one  King  and  La,wgiver,  one 
Judge  and  Ruler  of  mankind.  Our  country  is  the  world, 
our  countrymen  are  all  mankind.  We  love  the  land  of  our 
nativity  only  as  we  love  all  other  lands.  The  interests  and 
rights  of  American  citizens  are  not  dearer  to  us  than  those 
of  the  whole  human  race.  Hence  we  can  allow  no  appeal 
to  patriotism  to  revenge  any  national  insult  or  injury.  . . 

“ We  conceive  that  a nation  has  no  right  to  defend  itself 
against  foreign  enemies  or  to  punish  its  invaders,  and  no 
individual  possesses  that  right  in  his  own  case,  and  the  unit 
cannot  be  of  greater  importance  than  the  aggregate.  If 
soldiers  thronging  from  abroad  with  intent  to  commit  rapine 
and  destroy  life  may  not  be  resisted  by  the  people  or  the 
magistracy,  then  ought  no  resistance  to  be  offered  to 
domestic  troublers  of  the  public  peace  or  of  private 
security. 

“ The  dogma  that  all  the  governments  of  the  world  are 
approvingly  ordained  of  God,  and  that  the  powers  that  be 
in  the  United  States^ in  Russia,  in  Turkey,  are  in  accord- 
ance with  his  will,  is  no  less  absurd  than  impious.  It 
makes  the  impartial  Author  of  our  existence  unequal  and 
tyrannical.  It  cannot  be  affirmed  that  the  powers  that  be 
in  any  nation  are  actuated  by  the  spirit  or  guided  by  the 
example  of  Christ  in  the  treatment  of  enemies  ; therefore 
they  cannot  be  agreeable  to  the  will  of  God,  and  therefore 
their  overthrow  by  a spiritual  regeneration  of  their  sub- 
jects is  inevitable. 

“ We  regard  as  unchristian  and  unlawful  not  only  all  wars, 
whether  offensive  or  defensive,  but  all  preparations  for 
war  ; every  naval  ship,  every  arsenal,  every  fortification,  we 
regard  as  unchristian  and  unlawful  ; the  existence  of  any 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


5 


kind  of  standing  army,  all  military  chieftains,  all  monu- 
ments commemorative  of  victory  over  a fallen  foe,  all 
trophies  won  in  battle,  all  celebrations  in  honor  of  military 
exploits,  all  appropriations  for  defense  by  arms  ; we  regard 
as  unchristian  and  unlawful  every  edict  of  government 
requiring  of  its  subjects  military  service. 

“ Hence  we  deem  it  unlawful  to  bear  arms,  and  we  can- 
not hold  any  office  which  imposes  on  its  incumbent  the  obli- 
gation to  compel  men  to  do  right  on  pain  of  imprisonment 
or  death.  We  therefore  voluntarily  exclude  ourselves  from 
every  legislative  and  judicial  body,  and  repudiate  all  human 
politics,  worldly  honors,  and  stations  of  authority.  If  we 
cannot  occupy  a seat  in  the  legislature  or  on  the  bench, 
neither  can  we  elect  others  to  act  as  our  substitutes  in  any 
such  capacity.  It  follows  that  we  cannot  sue  any  man  at 
law  to  force  him  to  return  anything  he  may  have  wrongly 
taken  from  us  ; if  he  has  seized  our  coat,  we  shall  surrender 
him  our  cloak  also  rather  than  subject  him  to  punishment. 

“We  believe  that  the  penal  code  of  the  old  covenant — 
an  eye  for  an  eye,  and  a tooth  for  a tooth — has  been  abro- 
gated by  Jesus  Christ,  and  that  under  the  new  covenant 
the  forgiveness  instead  of  the  punishment  of  enemies  has 
been  enjoined  on  all  his  disciples  in  all  cases  whatsoever. 
To  extort  money  from  enemies,  cast  them  into  prison,  exile 
or  execute  them,  is  obviously  not  to  forgive  but  to  take 
retribution. 

“ The  history  of  mankind  is  crowded  with  evidences 
proving  that  physical  coercion  is  not  adapted  to  moral  re- 
generation, and  that  the  sinful  dispositions  of  men  can  be 
subdued  only  by  love  ; that  evil  can  be  exterminated  only 
by  good  ; that  it  is  not  safe  to  rely  upon  the  strength  of  an 
arm  to  preserve  us  from  harm  ; that  there  is  great  security 
in  being  gentle,  long-suffering,  and  abundant  in  mercy  ; 
that  it  is  only  the  meek  who  shall  inherit  the  earth  ; for 
those  who  take  up  the  sword  shall  perish  by  the  sword. 


6 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


“ Hence  as  a measure  of  sound  policy — of  safety  to 
property,  life,  and  liberty — of  public  quietude  and  private 
enjoyment — as  well  as  on  the  ground  of  allegiance  to  Him 
who  is  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords,  we  cordially 
adopt  the  non-resistance  principle,  being  confident  that  it 
provides  for  all  possible  consequences,  is  armed  with 
omnipotent  power,  and  must  ultimately  triumph  over  every 
assailing  force. 

“We  advocate  no  Jacobinical  doctrines.  The  spirit  of 
Jacobinism  is  the  spirit  of  retaliation,  violence,  and 
murder.  It  neither  fears  God  nor  regards  man.  We 
would  be  filled  with  the  spirit  of  Christ.  If  we  abide 
by  our  fundamental  principle  of  not  opposing  evil  by 
evil  we  cannot  participate  in  sedition,  treason,  or  violence. 
We  shall  submit  to  every  ordinance  and  every  requirement 
of  government,  except  such  as  are  contrary  to  the  com- 
mands of  the  Gospel,  and  in  no  case  resist  the  operation  of 
law,  except  by  meekly  submitting  to  the  penalty  of  dis- 
obedience. 

“ But  while  we  shall  adhere  to  the  doctrine  of  non-resist- 
ance and  passive  submission  to  enemies,  we  purpose,  in  a 
moral  and  spiritual  sense,  to  assail  iniquity  in  high  places 
and  in  low  places,  to  apply  our  principles  to  all  existing 
evil,  political,  legal,  and  ecclesiastical  institutions,  and  to 
hasten  the  time  when  the  kingdoms  of  this  world  will  have 
become  the  kingdom  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  It  appears 
to  us  a self-evident  truth  that  whatever  the  Gospel  is 
designed  to  destroy  at  any  period  of  the  world,  being  con- 
trary to  it,  ought  now  to  be  abandoned.  If,  then,  the  time 
is  predicted  when  swords  shall  be  beaten  into  plowshares 
and  spears  into  pruning  hooks,  and  men  shall  not  learn  the 
art  of  war  any  more,  it  follows  that  all  who  manufacture, 
sell,  or  wield  these  deadly  weapons  do  thus  array  them- 
selves against  the  peaceful  dominion  of  the  Son  of  God  on 
earth. 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


7 


“ Having  thus  stated  our  principles,  we  proceed  to 
specify  the  measures  we  propose  to  adopt  in  carrying  our 
object  into  effect. 

“ We  expect  to  prevail  through  the  Foolishness  of 
Preaching.  We  shall  endeavor  to  promulgate  our  views 
among  all  persons,  to  whatever  nation,  sect,  or  grade  of 
society  they  may  belong.  Flence  we  shall  organize  public 
lectures,  circulate  tracts  and  publications,  form  societies, 
and  petition  every  governing  body.  It  will  be  our  leading 
object  to  devise  ways  and  means  for  effecting  a radical 
change  in  the  views,  feelings,  and  practices  of  society 
respecting  the  sinfulness  of  war  and  the  treatment  of 
enemies. 

“ In  entering  upon  the  great  work  before  us,  we  are  not 
unmindful  that  in  its  prosecution  we  may  be  called  to  test 
our  sincerity  even  as  in  a fiery  ordeal.  It  may  subject  us 
to  insult,  outrage,  suffering,  yea,  even  death  itself.  We 
anticipate  no  small  amount  of  misconception,  misrepresen- 
tation, and  calumny.  Tumults  may  arise  against  us.  The 
proud  and  pharisaical,  the  ambitious  and  tyrannical,  princi- 
palities and  powers,  may  combine  to  crush  us.  So  they 
treated  the  Messiah  whose  example  we  are  humbly  striving 
to  imitate.  We  shall  not  be  afraid  of  their  terror.  Our 
confidence  is  in  the  Lord  Almighty  and  not  in  man.  Hav- 
ing withdrawn  from  human  protection,  what  can  sustain  us 
but  that  faith  which  overcomes  the  world  ? We  shall  not 
think  it  strange  concerning  the  fiery  trial  which  is  to  try  us, 
but  rejoice  inasmuch  as  we  are  partakers  of  Christ’s  suffer- 
ings. 

“ Wherefore  we  commit  the  keeping  of  our  souls  to  God. 
For  every  one  that  forsakes  houses,  or  brethren,  or  sisters, 
or  father,  or  mother,  or  wife,  or  children,  or  lands  for 
Christ’s  sake,  shall  receive  a hundredfold,  and  shall  inherit 
everlasting  life. 

“ Firmly  relying  upon  the  certain  and  universal  triumph 


8 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


of  the  sentiments  contained  in  this  declaration,  however 
formidable  may  be  the  opposition  arrayed  against  them,  we 
hereby  affix  our  signatures  to  it  ; commending  it  to  the 
reason  and  conscience  of  mankind,  and  resolving,  in  the 
strength  of  the  Lord  God,  to  calmly  and  meekly  abide  the 
issue.” 

Immediately  after  this  declaration  a Society  for  Non- 
resistance  was  founded  by  Garrison,  and  a journal  called 
the  Non-resistant,  in  which  the  doctrine  of  non-resistance 
was  advocated  in  its  full  significance  and  in  all  its  conse- 
quences, as  it  had  been  expounded  in  the  declaration. 
Further  information  as  to  the  ultimate  destiny  of  the 
society  and  the  journal  I gained  from  the  excellent  biog- 
raphy of  W.  L.  Garrison,  the  work  of  his  son. 

The  society  and  the  journal  did  not  exist  for  long.  The 
greater  number  of  Garrison’s  fellow-workers  in  the  move- 
ment for  the  liberation  of  the  slaves,  fearing  that  the  too 
radical  programme  of  the  journal,  the  Non-resistant,  might 
keep  people  away  from  the  practical  work  of  negro-eman- 
cipation, gave  up  the  profession  of  the  principle  of  non- 
resistance  as  it  had  been  expressed  in  the  declaration,  and 
both  society  and  journal  ceased  to  exist. 

This  declaration  of  Garrison’s  gave  so  powerful  and 
eloquent  an  expression  of  a confession  of  faith  of  such 
importance  to  men,  that  one  would  have  thought  it  must 
have  produced  a strong  impression  on  people,  and  have 
become  known  throughout  the  world  and  the  subject  of 
discussion  on  every  side.  Bui  nothing  of  the  kind  oc- 
curred. Not  only  was  it  unknown  in  Europe,  even  the 
Americans,  who  have  such  a high  opinion  of  Garrison, 
hardly  knew  of  the  declaration. 

Another  champion  of  non-resistance  has  been  over- 
looked in  the  same  way — the  American  Adin  Ballou,  who 
lately  died,  after  spending  fifty  years  in  preaching  this 


IS  WITHIN-  YOU. 


9 


doctrine.  How  great  the  ignorance  is  of  everything  relat- 
ing to  the  question  of  non-resistance  may  be  seen  from  the 
fact  that  Garrison  the  son,  who  has  written  an  excellent 
biography  of  his  father  in  four  great  volumes,  in  answer  to 
my  inquiry  whether  there  are  existing  now  societies  for 
non-resistance,  and  adherents  of  the  doctrine,  told  me 
that  as  far  as  he  knew  that  society  had  broken  up,  and  that 
there  were  no  adherents  of  that  doctrine,  while  at  the  very 
time  when  he  was  writing  to  me  there  was  living,  at  Hope- 
dale  in  Massachusetts,  Adin  Ballou,  who  had  taken  part  in 
the  labors  of  Garrison  the  father,  and  had  devoted  fifty 
years  of  his  life  to  advocating,  both  orally  and  in  print,  the 
doctrine  of  non-resistance.  Later  on  I received  a letter 
from  Wilson,  a pupil  and  colleague  of  Ballou’s,  and  entered 
into  correspondence  with  Ballou  himself.  I wrote  to 
Ballou,  and  he  answered  me  and  sent  me  his  works.  Here 
is  the  summary  of  some  extracts  from  them  ; 

“ Jesus  Christ  is  my  Lord  and  teacher,”  says  Ballou  in 
one  of  his  essays  exposing  the  inconsistency  of  Christians 
who  allowed  a right  of  self-defense  and  of  warfare.  “ I 
have  promised,  leaving  all  else,  to  follow  him,  through 
good  and  through  evil,  to  death  itself.  But  I am  a citizen 
of  the  democratic  republic  of  the  United  States  ; and  in 
allegiance  to  it  I have  sworn  to  defend  the  Constitution  of 
my  country,  if  need  be,  with  my  life.  Christ  requires  of 
me  to  do  unto  others  as  I would  they  should  do  unto  me. 
The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  requires  of  me  to  do 
unto  two  millions  of  slaves  [at  that  time  there  were  slaves  ; 
now  one  might  venture  to  substitute  the  word  ‘laborers  ’] 
the  very  opposite  of  what  I would  they  should  do  unto  me 
— that  is,  to  help  to  keep  them  in  their  present  condition 
of  slavery.  And,  in  spite  of  this,  I continue  to  elect  or  be 
elected,  I propose  to  vote,  I am  even  ready  to  be  appointed 
to  any  office  under  government.  That  will  not  hinder  me 
from  being  a Christian.  I shall  still  profess  Christianity, 


lO 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


and  shall  find  no  difficulty  in  carrying  out  my  covenant 
with  Christ  and  with  the  government. 

“ Jesus  Christ  forbids  me  to  resist  evil  doers,  and  to  take 
from  them  an  eye  for  an  eye,  a tooth  for  a tooth,  blood- 
shed for  bloodshed,  and  life  for  life. 

“ My  government  demands  from  me  quite  the  opposite, 
and  bases  a system  of  self-defense  on  gallows,  musket,  and 
sword,  to  be  used  against  its  foreign  and  domestic  foes. 
And  the  land  is  filled  accordingly  with  gibbets,  prisons, 
arsenals,  ships  of  war,  and  soldiers. 

“ In  the  maintenance  and  use  of  these  expensive  appli- 
ances for  murder,  we  can  very  suitably  exercise  to  the  full 
the  virtues  of  forgiveness  to  those  who  injure  us,  love 
toward  our  enemies,  blessings  to  those  who  curse  us,  and 
doing  good  to  those  who  hate  us. 

“ For  this  we  have  a succession  of  Christian  priests  to 
pray  for  us  and  beseech  the  blessing  of  Heaven  on  the 
holy  work  of  slaughter. 

“ I see  all  this  (/.  e.,  the  contradiction  between  profession 
and  practice),  and  I continue  to  profess  religion  and  take 
part  in  government,  and  pride  myself  on  being  at  the  same 
time  a devout  Christian  and  a devoted  servant  of  the  gov- 
ernment. I do  not  want  to  agree  with  these  senseless 
notions  of  non-resistance.  I cannot  renounce  my  authority 
and  leave  only  immoral  men  in  control  of  the  government. 
The  Constitution  says  the  government  has  the  right  to 
declare  war,  and  I assent  to  this  and  support  it,  and  swear 
that  I will  support  it.  And  I do  not  for  that  cease  to  be  a 
Christian.  War,  too,  is  a Christian  duty.  Is  it  not  a Chris- 
tian duty  to  kill  hundreds  of  thousands  of  one’s  fellow-men, 
to  outrage  women,  to  raze  and  burn  towns,  and  to  practice 
every  possible  cruelty  ? It  is  time  to  dismiss  all  these  false 
sentimentalities.  It  is  the  truest  means  of  forgiving  injuries 
and  loving  enemies.  If  we  only  do  it  in  the  spirit  of  love, 
nothing  can  be  more  Christian  than  such  murder.” 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


II 


In  another  pamphlet,  entitled  “ How  many  Men  are  Nec- 
essary to  Change  a Crime  into  a Virtue  ? ” he  says  ; “ One 
man  may  not  kill.  If  he  kills  a fellow-creature,  he  is  a 
murderer.  If  two,  ten,  a hundred  men  do  so,  they,  too,  are 
murderers.  But  a government  or  a nation  may  kill  as  many 
men  as  it  chooses,  and  that  will  not  be  murder,  but  a great 
and  noble  action.  Only  gather  the  people  together  on  a 
large  scale,  and  a battle  of  ten  thousand  men  becomes  an 
innocent  action.  But  precisely  how  many  people  must 
there  be  to  make  it  so  ? — that  is  the  question.  One  man 
cannot  plunder  and  pillage,  but  a whole  nation  can.  But 
precisely  how  many  are  needed  to  make  it  permissible  ? 
Why  is  it  that  one  man,  ten,  a hundred,  may  not  break  the 
law  of  God,  but  a great  number  may  ? ” 

And  here  is  a version  of  Ballou’s  catechism  composed 
for  his  flock  : 


CATECHISM  OF  NON-RESISTANCE. 

Q.  Whence  is  the  word  “ non-resistance  ” derived  ? 

A.  From  the  command,  “ Resist  not  evil.”  (M.  v.  39.) 

Q.  What  does  this  word  express  ? 

A.  It  expresses  a lofty  Christian  virtue  enjoined  on  us  by 
Christ. 

Q.  Ought  the  word  “ non-resistance  ” to  be  taken  in  its 
widest  sense — that  is  to  say,  as  intending  that  we  should 
not  offer  any  resistance  of  any  kind  to  evil  ? 

A.  No  ; it  ought  to  be  taken  in  the  exact  sense  of  our 
Saviour’s  teaching — that  is,  not  repaying  evil  for  evil.  We 
ought  to  oppose  evil  by  every  righteous  means  in  our 
power,  but  not  by  evil. 

Q.  What  is  there  to  show  that  Christ  enjoined  non- 
resistance  in  that  sense  ? 

A.  It  is  shown  by  the  words  he  uttered  at  the  same 
time.  He  said  : “Ye  have  heard,  it  was  said  of  old,  An 


12 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


eye  for  an  eye,  and  a tooth  for  a tooth.  But  I say  unto  you 
Resist  not  evil.  But  if  one  smites  thee  on  the  right  cheek, 
turn  him  the  other  also ; and  if  one  will  go  to  law  with  thee 
to  take  thy  coat  from  thee,  give  him  thy  cloak  also.” 

Q.  Of  whom  was  he  speaking  in  the  words,  “ Ye  have 
heard  it  was  said  of  old  ” ? 

A.  Of  the  patriarchs  and  the  prophets,  contained  in  the 
Old  Testament,  which  the  Hebrews  ordinarily  call  the  Law 
and  the  Prophets. 

Q.  What  utterances  did  Christ  refer  to  in  the  words,  “ It 
was  said  of  old  ” ? 

A.  The  utterances  of  Noah,  Moses,  and  the  other  proph- 
ets, in  which  they  admit  the  right  of  doing  bodily  harm  to 
those  who  inflict  harm,  so  as  to  punish  and  prevent  evil 
deeds. 

Q.  Quote  such  utterances. 

A.  “ Whoso  sheddeth  man’s  blood,  by  man  shall  his  blood 
be  shed.” — Gen.  ix.  6. 

“ He  that  smiteth  a man,  so  that  he  die,  shall  be  surely 
puttodeath.  . . And  if  any  mischief  follow,  then  thou  shalt 
give  life  for  life,  eye  for  eye,  tooth  for  tooth,  hand  for  hand, 
foot  for  foot,  burning  for  burning,  wound  for  wound,  stripe 
for  stripe.” — Ex.  xxi.  12  and  23-25. 

“ He  that  killeth  any  man  shall  surely  be  put  to  death- 
And  if  a man  cause  a blemish  in  his  neighbor,  as  he  hath 
done,  so  shall  it  be  done  unto  him  : breach  for  breach,  eye 
for  eye,  tooth  for  tooth.” — Lev.  xxiv.  17,  19,  20. 

“Then  the  judges  shall  make  diligent  inquisition;  and 
behold,  if  the  witness  be  a false  witness,  and  hath  testified 
falsely  against  his  brother,  then  shall  ye  do  unto  him  as  he 
had  thought  to  have  done  unto  his  brother.  , . And  thine 
eye  shall  not  pity  ; but  life  shall  go  for  life,  eye  for  eye, 
tooth  for  tooth,  hand  for  hand,  foot  for  foot.” — Deut.  xix. 
18,  21. 

Noah,  Moses,  and  the  Prophets  taught  that  he  who  kills. 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


13 


maims,  or  injures  his  neighbors  does  evil.  To  resist  such 
evil,  and  to  prevent  it,  the  evil  doer  must  be  punished  with 
death,  or  maiming,  or  some  physical  injury.  Wrong  must 
be  opposed  by  wrong,  murder  by  murder,  injury  by  injury, 
evil  by  evil.  Thus  taught  Noah,  Moses,  and  the  Prophets. 
But  Christ  rejects  all  this.  “ I say  unto  you,”  is  written  in 
the  Gospel,  “ resist  not  evil,”  do  not  oppose  injury  with 
injury,  but  rather  bear  repeated  injury  from  the  evil  doer. 
What  was  permitted  is  forbidden.  When  we  understand 
what  kind  of  resistance  they  taught,  we  know  exactly  what 
resistance  Christ  forbade. 

Q.  Then  the  ancients  allowed  the  resistance  of  injury  by 
injury  ? 

A.  Yes.  But  Jesus  forbids  it.  The  Christian  has  in  no 
case  the  right  to  put  to  death  his  neighbor  who  has  done 
him  evil,  or  to  do  him  injury  in  return. 

Q.  May  he  kill  or  maim  him  in  self-defense  ? 

A.  No. 

Q.  May  he  go  with  a complaint  to  the  judge  that  he  who 
has  wronged  him  may  be  punished  ? 

A.  No.  What  he  does  through  others,  he  is  in  reality 
doing  himself. 

Q.  Can  he  fight  in  conflict  with  foreign  enemies  or  dis- 
turbers of  the  peace  ? 

A.  Certainly  not.  He  cannot  take  any  part  in  war  or  in 
preparations  for  war.  He  cannot  make  use  of  a deadly 
weapon.  He  cannot  oppose  injury  to  injury,  whether  he  is 
alone  or  with  others,  either  in  person  or  through  other  people. 

Q.  Can  he  voluntarily  vote  or  furnish  soldiers  for  the 
government  ? 

A.  He  can  do  nothing  of  that  kind  if  he  wishes  to  be 
faithful  to  Christ’s  law. 

Q.  Can  he  voluntarily  give  money  to  aid  a government 
resting  on  military  force,  capital  punishment,  and  violence 
in  general  ? 


14 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


A.  No,  unless  the  money  is  destined  for  some  special 
object,  right  in  itself,  and  good  both  in  aim  and  means. 

Q.  Can  he  pay  taxes  to  such  a gove,rnment  ? 

A.  No  ; he  ought  not  voluntarily  to  pay  taxes,  but  he 
ought  not  to  resist  the  collecting  of  taxes.  A tax  is  levied 
by  the  government,  and  is  exacted  independently  of  the 
will  of  the  subject.  It  is  impossible  to  resist  it  without 
having  recourse  to  violence  of  some  kind.  Since  the 
Christian  cannot  employ  violence,  he  is  obliged  to  offer  his 
property  at  once  to  the  loss  by  violence  inflicted  on  it  by 
the  authorities. 

Q.  Can  a Christian  give  a vote  at  elections,  or  take  part 
in  government  or  law  business? 

A.  No  ; participation  in  election,  government,  or  law 
business  is  participation  in  government  by  force. 

Q.  Wherein  lies  the  chief  significance  of  the  doctrine  of 
non-resistance  ? 

A.  In  the  fact  that  it  alone  allows  of  the  possibility  of 
eradicating  evil  from  one’s  own  heart,  and  also  from  one’s 
neighbor’s.  This  doctrine  forbids  doing  that  whereby  evil 
has  endured  for  ages  and  multiplied  in  the  world.  He 
who  attacks  another  and  injures  him,  kindles  in  the  other 
a feeling  of  hatred,  the  root  of  every  evil.  To  injure 
another  because  he  has  injured  us,  even  with  the  aim  of 
overcoming  evil,  is  doubling  the  harm  for  him  and  for  one- 
self ; it  is  begetting,  or  at  least  setting  free  and  inciting, 
that  evil  spirit  which  we  should  wish  to  drive  out.  Satan 
can  never  be  driven  out  by  Satan.  Error  can  never  be 
corrected  by  error,  and  evil  cannot  be  vanquished  by  evil. 

True  non-resistance  is  the  only  real  resistance  to  evil. 
It  is  crushing  the  serpent’s  head.  It  destroys  and  in  the 
end  extirpates  the  evil  feeling. 

Q.  But  if  that  is  the  true  meaning  of  the  rule  of  non- 
resistance,  can  it  always  be  put  into  practice  ? 

A.  It  can  be  put  into  practice  like  every  virtue  enjoined 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


15 


by  the  law  of  God.  A virtue  cannot  be  practiced  in  all 
circumstances  without  self-sacrifice,  privation,  suffering, 
and  in  extreme  cases  loss  of  life  itself.  But  he  who  esteems 
life  more  than  fulfilling  the  will  of  God  is  already  dead  to 

the  only  true  life.  Trying  to  save  his  life  he  loses  it. 

Besides,  generally  speaking,  where  non-resistance  costs  the 
sacrifice  of  a single  life  or  of  some  material  welfare,  resist- 
ance costs  a thousand  such  sacrifices. 

Non-resistance  is  Salvation  ; Resistance  is  Ruin. 

It  is  incomparably  less  dangerous  to  act  justly  than 
unjustly,  to  submit  to  injuries  than  to  resist  them  with 

violence,  less  dangerous  even  in  one’s  relations  to  the 

present  life.  If  all  men  refused  to  resist  evil  by  evil  our 
world  would  be  happy. 

Q.  But  so  long  as  only  a few  act  thus,  what  will  happen 
to  them  ? 

A.  If  only  one  man  acted  thus,  and  all  the  rest  agreed 
to  crucify  him,  would  it  not  be  nobler  for  him  to  die  in  the 
glory  of  non-resisting  love,  praying  for  his  enemies,  than 
to  live  to  wear  the  crown  of  Caesar  stained  with  the  blood 
of  the  slain  ? However,  one  man,  or  a thousand  men, 
firmly  resolved  not  to  oppose  evil  by  evil  are  far  more  free 
from  danger  by  violence  than  those  who  resort  to  violence, 
whether  among  civilized  or  savage  neighbors.  The  robber, 
the  murderer,  and  the  cheat  will  leave  them  in  peace, 
sooner  than  those  who  oppose  them  with  arms,  and  those 
who  take  up  the  sword  shall  perish  by  the  sword,  but  those 
who  seek  after  peace,  and  behave  kindly  and  harmlessly, 
forgiving  and  forgetting  injuries,  for  the  most  part  enjoy 
peace,  or,  if  they  die,  they  die  blessed.  In  this  way,  if  all 
kept  the  ordinance  of  non-resistance,  there  would  obviously 
be  no  evil  nor  crime.  If  the  majority  acted  thus  they 
would  establish  the  rule  of  love  and  good  will  even  over 
evil  doers,  never  opposing  evil  with  evil,  and  never  resort- 
ing to  force.  If  there  were  a moderately  large  minority  of 


1 6 “ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 

such  men,  they  would  exercise  such  a salutary  moral 
influence  on  society  that  every  cruel  punishment  would  be 
abolished,  and  violence  and  feud  would  be  replaced  by 
peace  and  love.  Even  if  there  were  only  a small  minority 
of  them,  they  would  rarely  experience  anything  worse  than 
the  world’s  contempt,  and  meantime  the  world,  though 
unconscious  of  it,  and  not  grateful  for  it,  would  be  con- 
tinually becoming  wiser  and  better  for  their  unseen  action 
on  it.  And  if  in  the  worst  case  some  members  of  the 
minority  were  persecuted  to  death,  in  dying  for  the  truth 
the}’’  would  have  left  behind  them  their  doctrine,  sanctified 
by  the  blood  of  their  martyrdom.  Peace,  then,  to  all  who 
seek  peace,  and  may  overruling  love  be  the  imperishable 
heritage  of  every  soul  who  obeys  willingly  Christ’s  word, 
“ Resist  not  evil.” 

Adin  Ballou. 

For  fifty  years  Ballou  wrote  and  published  books  dealing 
principally  with  the  question  of  non-resistance  to  evil  by 
force.  In  these  works,  which  are  distinguished  by  the 
clearness  of  their  thought  and  eloquence  of  exposition,  the 
question  is  looked  at  from  every  possible  side,  and  the 
binding  nature  of  this  command  on  every  Christian  who 
acknowledges  the  Bible  as  the  revelation  of  God  is  firmly 
established.  All  the  ordinary  objections  to  the  doctrine  of 
non-resistance  from  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  are 
brought  forward,  such  as  the  expulsion  of  the  money- 
changers from  the  Temple,  and  so  on,  and  arguments 
follow  in  disproof  of  them  all.  The  practical  reasonable- 
ness of  this  rule  of  conduct  is  shown  independently  of 
Scripture,  and  all  the  objections  ordinarily  made  against 
its  practicability  are  stated  and  refuted.  Thus  one  chapter 
in  a book  of  his  treats  of  non-resistance  in  exceptional 
cases,  and  he  owns  in  this  connection  that  if  there  were 
cases  in  which  the  rule  of  non-resistance  were  impossible 


/S  WITHIN  YOU." 


17 


of  application,  it  would  prove  that  the  law  was  not  uni- 
versally authoritative.  Quoting  these  cases,  he  shows  that 
it  is  precisely  in  them  that  the  application  of  the  rule  is 
both  necessary  and  reasonable.  There  is  no  aspect  of  the 
question,  either  on  his  side  or  on  his  opponents’,  which  he 
has  not  followed  up  in  his  writings.  I mention  all  this  to 
show  the  unmistakable  interest  which  such  works  ought  to 
have  for  men  who  make  a profession  of  Christianity,  and 
because  one  would  have  thought  Ballou’s  work  would 
have  been  well  known,  and  the  ideas  expressed  by  him 
would  have  been  either  accepted  or  refuted  ; but  such  has 
not  been  the  case. 

The  work  of  Garrison,  the  father,  in  his  foundation  of 
the  Society  of  Non-resistants  and  his  Declaration,  even 
more  than  my  correspondence  with  the  Quakers,  convinced 
me  of  the  fact  that  the  departure  of  the  ruling  form  of 
Christianity  from  the  law  of  Christ  on  non-resistance  by 
force  is  an  error  that  has  long  been  observed  and  pointed 
out,  and  that  men  have  labored,  and  are  still  laboring,  to 
correct.  Ballou’s  work  confirmed  me  still  more  in  this 
view.  But  the  fate  of  Garrison,  still  more  that  of  Ballou, 
in  being  completely  unrecognized  in  spite  of  fifty  years  of 
obstinate  and  persistent  work  in  the  same  direction,  con- 
firmed me  in  the  idea  that  there  exists  a kind  of  tacit  but 
steadfast  conspiracy  of  silence  about  all  such  efforts. 

Ballou  died  in  August,  1890,  and  there  was  an  obituary 
notice  of  him  in  an  American  journal  of  Christian  views 
i^Religio -philosophical  Journal,  August  23).  In  this  lauda- 
tory notice  it  is  recorded  that  Ballou  was  the  spiritual 
director  of  a parish,  that  he  delivered  from  eight  to  nine 
thousand  sermons,  married  one  thousand  couples,  and  wrote 
about  five  hundred  articles  ; but  there  is  not  a single  word 
said  of  the  object  to  which  he  devoted  his  life  ; even  the 
word  “ non-resistance  ” is  not  mentioned.  Precisely  as  it 
was  with  all  the  preaching  of  the  Quakers  for  two  hundred 


i8 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


years,  and,  too,  with  the  efforts  of  Garrison  the  father,  the 
foundation  of  his  society  and  journal,  and  his  Declaration, 
so  it  is  with  the  life-work  of  Ballou.  It  seems  just  as  though 
it  did  not  exist  and  never  had  existed. 

We  have  an  astounding  example  of  the  obscurity  of 
works  which  aim  at  expounding  the  doctrine  of  non-resist- 
ance to  evil  by  force,  and  at  confuting  those  who  do  not 
recognize  this  commandment,  in  the  book  of  the  Tsech 
Helchitsky,  which  has  only  lately  been  noticed  and  has  not 
hitherto  been  printed. 

Soon  after  the  appearance  of  my  book  in  German,  I 
received  a letter  from  Prague,  from  a professor  of  the  uni- 
versity there,  informing  me  of  the  existence  of  a work, 
never  yet  printed,  by  Helchitsky,  a Tsech  of  the  fifteenth 
century,  entitled  “ The  Net  of  Faith.”  In  this  work,  the 
professor  told  me,  Helchitsky  expressed  precisely  the  same 
view  as  to  true  and  false  Christianity  as  I had  expressed 
in  my  book  “ What  I Believe.”  The  professor  wrote  to 
me  that  Helchitsky’s  work  was  to  be  published  for  the  first 
time  in  the  Tsech  language  in  the  Journal  of  The  Petersburg 
Academy  of  Science.  Since  I could  not  obtain  the  book 
itself,  I tried  to  make  myself  acquainted  with  what  was 
known  of  Helchitsky,  and  I gained  the  following  informa- 
tion from  a German  book  sent  me  by  the  Prague  professor 
and  from  Pypin’s  history  of  Tsech  literature.  This  was 
Pypin’s  account  : 

“‘The  Net  of  Faith’  is  Christ’s  teaching,  which  ought 
to  draw  man  up  out  of  the  dark  depths  of  the  sea  of  world- 
liness and  his  own  iniquity.  True  faith  consists  in  believ- 
ing God’s  Word  ; but  now  a time  has  come  when  men  mis- 
take the  true  faith  for  heresy,  and  therefore  it  is  for  the 
reason  to  point  out  what  the  true  faith  consists  in,  if  any- 
one does  not  know  this.  It  is  hidden  in  darkness  from 
men,  and  they  do  not  recognize  the  true  law  of  Christ. 

“To  make  this  law  plain,  Helchitsky  points  to  the 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


19 


primitive  organization  of  Christian  society — the  organiza- 
tion which,  he  says,  is  now  regarded  in  the  Roman  Church 
as  an  abominable  heresy.  This  primitive  Church  was  his 
special  ideal  of  social  organization,  founded  on  equality, 
liberty,  and  fraternity.  Christianity,  in  Helchitsky’s  view, 
still  preserves  these  elements,  and  it  is  only  necessary  for 
society  to  return  to  its  pure  doctrine  to  render  unnecessary 
every  other  form  of  social  order  in  which  kings  and  popes 
are  essential ; the  law  of  love  would  alone  be  sufficient  in 
every  case. 

“ Historically,  Helchitsky  attributes  the  degeneration  of 
Christianity  to  the  times  of  Constantine  the  Great,  whom 
the  Pope  Sylvester  admitted  into  the  Christian  Church 
with  all  his  heathen  morals  and  life.  Constantine,  in  his 
turn,  endowed  the  Pope  with  worldly  riches  and  power. 
From  that  time  forward  these  two  ruling  powers  were  con- 
stantly aiding  one  another  to  strive  for  nothing  but  out- 
ward glory.  Divines  and  ecclesiastical  dignitaries  began 
to  concern  themselves  only  about  subduing  the  whole 
world  to  their  authority,  incited  men  against  one  another 
to  murder  and  plunder,  and  in  creed  and  life  reduced 
Christianity  to  a nullity.  Helchitsky  denies  completely 
the  right  to  make  war  and  to  inflict  the  punishment  of 
death  ; every  soldier,  even  the  ‘ knight,’  is  only  a violent 
evil  doer — a murderer.” 

The  same  account  is  given  by  the  German  book,  with 
the  addition  of  a few  biographical  details  and  some  extracts 
from  Helchitsky’s  writings. 

Having  learnt  the  drift  of  Helchitsky’s  teaching  in  this 
way,  I awaited  all  the  more  impatiently  the  appearance  of 
“The  Net  of  Faith  ” in  the  journal  of  the  Academy.  But 
one  year  passed,  then  two  and  three,  and  still  the  book  did 
not  appear.  It  was  only  in  1888  that  I learned  that  the 
printing  of  the  book,  which  had  been  begun,  was  stopped. 
I obtained  the  proofs  of  what  had  been  printed  and  read 


20 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


them  through.  It  is  a marvelous  book  from  every  point 
of  view. 

Its  general  tenor  is  given  with  perfect  accuracy  by 
Pypin.  Helchitsky’s  fundamental  idea  is  that  Christianity, 
by  allying  itself  with  temporal  power  in  the  days  of  Con- 
stantine, and  by  continuing  to  develop  in  such  conditions, 
has  become  completely  distorted,  and  has  ceased  to  be 
Christian  altogether.  Helchitsky  gave  the  title  “The  Net 
of  Faith  ” to  his  book,  taking  as  his  motto  the  verse  of  the 
Gospel  about  the  calling  of  the  disciples  to  be  fishers  of 
men;  and,  developing  this  metaphor,  he  says:  “Christ, 
by  means  of  his  disciples,  would  have  caught  all  the  world 
in  his  net  of  faith,  but  the  greater  fishes  broke  the  net  and 
escaped  out  of  it,  and  all  the  rest  have  slipped  through  the 
holes  made  by  the  greater  fishes,  so  that  the  net  has 
remained  quite  empty.  The  greater  fishes  who  broke 
the  net  are  the  rulers,  emperors,  popes,  kings,  who  have 
not  renounced  power,  and  instead  of  true  Christianity  have 
put  on  what  is  simply  a mask  of  it.”  Helchitsky  teaches 
precisely  what  has  been  and  is  taught  in  these  days  by  the 
non-resistant  Mennonites  and  Quakers,  and  in  former  times 
by  the  Bogomilites,  Paulicians,  and  many  others.  He 
teaches  that  Christianity,  expecting  from  its  adherents 
gentleness,  meekness,  peaceableness,  forgiveness  of  injuries, 
turning  the  other  cheek  when  one  is  struck,  and  love  for 
enemies,  is  inconsistent. with  the  use  of  force,  which  is  an 
indispensable  condition  of  authority. 

The  Christian,  according  to  Helchitsky’s  reasoning,  not 
only  cannot  be  a ruler  or  a soldier  ; he  cannot  take  any 
part  in  government  nor  in  trade,  or  even  be  a landowner  ; 
he  can  only  be  an  artisan  or  a husbandman. 

This  book  is  one  of  the  few  works  attacking  official 
Christianity  which  has  escaped  being  burned.  All  such 
so-called  heretical  works  were  burned  at  the  stake,  to- 
gether with  their  authors,  so  that  there  are  few  ancient 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


21 


works  exposing  the  errors  of  official  Christianity.  The 
book  has  a special  interest  for  this  reason  alone.  But 
apart  from  its  interest  from  every  point  of  view,  it  is  one 
of  the  most  remarkable  products  of  thought  for  its  depth 
of  aim,  for  the  astounding  strength  and  beauty  of  the 
national  language  in  which  it  is  written,  and  for  its  an- 
tiquity. And  yet  for  more  than  four  centuries  it  has 
remained  unprinted,  and  is  still  unknown,  except  to  a few 
learned  .specialists. 

One  would  have  thought  that  all  such  works,  whether  of 
the  Quakers,  of  Garrison,  of  Ballou,  or  of  Helchitsky, 
asserting  and  proving  as  they  do,  on  the  principles  of  the 
Gospel,  that  our  modern  world  takes  a false  view  of 
Christ’s  teaching,  would  have  awakened  interest,  excite- 
ment, talk,  and  discussion  among  spiritual  teachers  and 
their  flocks  alike. 

Works  of  this  kind,  dealing  with  the  very  essence  of 
Christian  doctrine,  ought,  one  would  have  thought,  to  have 
been  examined  and  accepted  as  true,  or  refuted  and  re- 
jected. But  nothing  of  the  kind  has  occurred,  and  the 
same  fate  has  been  repeated  with  all  those  works.  Men 
of  the  most  diverse  views,  believers,  and,  what  is  surprising, 
unbelieving  liberals  also,  as  though  by  agreement,  all  pre- 
serve the  same  persistent  silence  about  them,  and  all  that 
has  been  done  by  people  to  explain  the  true  meaning  of 
Christ’s  doctrine  remains  either  ignored  or  forgotten. 

But  it  is  still  more  astonishing  that  two  other  books,  of 
which  I heard  on  the  appearance  of  my  book,  should  be  so 
little  known.  I mean  Dymond’s  book  “ On  War,”  published 
for  the  first  time  in  London  in  1824,  and  Daniel  Musser’s 
book  on  “ Non-resistance,”  written  in  1864.  It  is  particularly 
astonishing  that  these  books  should  be  unknown,  because, 
apart  from  their  intrinsic  merits,  both  books  treat  not  so 
much  of  the  theory  as  of  the  practical  application  of  the 
theory  to  life,  of  the  attitude  of  Christianity  to  military 


22 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


ft 


service,  which  is  especially  important  and  interesting  now 
in  these  days  of  universal  conscription. 

People  will  ask,  perhaps  : How  ought  a subject  to  behave 
who  believes  that  war  is  inconsistent  with  his  religion  while 
the  government  demands  from  him  that  he  should  enter 
military  service  ? 

This  question  is,  I think,  a most  vital  one,  and  the 
answer  to  it  is  specially  important  in  these  days  of  uni- 
versal conscription.  All — or  at  least  the  great  majority  of 
the  people — are  Christians,  and  all  men  are  called  upon  for 
military  service.  How  ought  a man,  as  a Christian,  to  meet 
this  demand  ? This  is  the  gist  of  Dymond's  answer  : 

“ His  duty  is  humbly  but  steadfastly  to  refuse  to  serve.” 

There  are  some  people,  who,  without  any  definite  reason- 
ing about  it,  conclude  straightway  that  the  responsibility  of 
government  measures  rests  entirely  on  those  who  resolve  on 
them,  or  that  the  governments  and  sovereigns  decide  the 
question  of  what  is  good  or  bad  for  their  subjects,  and  the 
duty  of  the  subjects  is  merely  to  obe3^  I think  that  argu- 
ments of  this  kind  only  obscure  men’s  conscience.  I can- 
not take  part  in  the  councils  of  government,  and  therefore 
I am  not  responsible  for  its  misdeeds.  Indeed,  but  we  are 
responsible  for  our  own  misdeeds.  And  the  misdeeds  of 
our  rulers  become  our  own,  if  we,  knowing  that  they  are 
misdeeds,  assist  in  carrying  them  out.  Those  who  suppose 
that  they  are  bound  to  obey  the  government,  and  that  the 
responsibility  for  the  misdeeds  they  commit  is  transferred 
from  them  to  their  rulers,  deceive  themselves.  They  say  : 
“We  give  our  acts  up  to  the  will  of  others,  and  our  acts 
cannot  be  good  or  bad  ; there  is  no  merit  in  what  is  good 
nor  responsibility  for  what  is  evil  in  our  actions,  since  they 
are  not  done  of  our  own  will.” 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  very  same  thing  is  said  in  the 
instructions  to  soldiers  which  they  make  them  learn — that 
is,  that  the  officer  is  alone  responsible  for  the  consequences 


/S  WITHIN  YOU. 


23 


of  his  command.  But  this  is  not  right.  A man  cannot 
get  rid  of  the  responsibility  for  his  own  actions.  And  that 
is  clear  from  the  following  example.  If  your  officer  com- 
mands you  to  kill  your  neighbor’s  child,  to  kill  your  father 
or  your  mother,  would  you  obey  ? If  you  would  not  obey, 
the  whole  argument  falls  to  the  ground,  for  if  you  can 
disobey  the  governors  in  one  case,  where  do  you  draw 
the  line  up  to  which  you  can  obey  them  ? There  is  no 
line  other  than  that  laid  down  by  Christianity,  and  that 
line  is  both  reasonable  and  practicable. 

And  therefore  we  consider  it  the  duty  of  every  man  who 
thinks  war  inconsistent  with  Christianity,  meekly  but 
firmly  to  refuse  to  serve  in  the  army.  And  let  those  whose 
lot  it  is  to  act  thus,  remember  that  the  fulfillment  of  a great 
duty  rests  with  them.  The  destiny  of  humanity  in  the 
world  depends,  so  far  as  it  depends  on  men  at  all,  on  their 
fidelity  to  their  religion.  Let  them  confess  their  conviction, 
and  stand  up  for  it,  and  not  in  words  alone,  but  in  suffer- 
ings too,  if  need  be.  If  you  believe  that  Christ  forbade 
murder,  pay  no  heed  to  the  arguments  nor  to  the  com- 
mands of  those  who  call  on  you  to  bear  a hand  in  it.  By 
such  a steadfast  refusal  to  make  use  of  force,  you  call 
down  on  yourselves  the  blessing  promised  to  those  “ who 
hear  these  sayings  and  do  them,”  and  the  time  will  come 
when  the  world  will  recognize  you  as  having  aided  in  the 
reformation  of  mankind. 

Musser’s  book  is  called  “ Non-resistance  Asserted,”  or 
” Kingdom  of  Christ  and  Kingdoms  of  this  World  Sepa- 
rated.” This  book  is  devoted  to  the  same  question,  and 
was  written  when  the  American  Government  was  exacting 
military  service  from  its  citizens  at  the  time  of  the  Civil 
War.  And  it  has,  too,  a value  for  all  time,  dealing  with 
the  question  how,  in  such  circumstances,  people  should  and 
can  refuse  to  enter  military  service.  Here  is  the  tenor  of 
the  author’s  introductory  remarks  ; “ It  is  well  known  that 


24 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


there  are  many  persons  in  the  United  States  who  refuse  to 
fight  on  grounds  of  conscience.  They  are  called  the 
‘ defenseless,’  or  ‘ non-resistant  ’ Christians.  These  Chris- 
tians refuse  to  defend  their  country,  to  bear  arms,  or  at  the 
call  of  government  to  make  war  on  its  enemies.  Till  lately 
this  religions  scruple  seemed  a valid  excuse  to  the  govern- 
ment, and  those  who  urged  it  were  let  off  service.  But  at 
the  beginning  of  our  Civil  War  public  opinion  was  agitated 
on  this  subject.  It  was  natural  that  persons  who  con- 
sidered it  their  duty  to  bear  all  the  hardships  and  dangers 
of  war  in  defense  of  their  country  should  feel  resentment 
against  those  persons  who  had  for  long  shared  with  them 
the  advantages  of  the  protection  of  the  government,  and 
who  now  in  time  of  need  and  danger  would  not  share  in 
bearing  the  labors  and  dangers  of  its  defense.  It  was  even 
natural  that  they  should  declare  the  attitude  of  such  men 
monstrous,  irrational,  and  suspicious.” 

A host  of  orators  and  writers,  our  author  tells  us,  arose 
to  oppose  this  attitude,  and  tried  to  prove  the  sinfulness  of 
non-resistance,  both  from  Scripture  and  on  common-sense 
grounds.  And  this  was  perfectly  natural,  and  in  many 
cases  the  authors  were  right — right,  that  is,  in  regard  to 
persons  who  did  not  renounce  the  benefits  they  received 
from  the  government  and  tried  to  avoid  the  hardships  of 
military  service,  but  not  right  in  regard  to  the  principle  of 
non-resistance  itself.  Above  all,  our  author  proves  the 
binding  nature  of  the  rule  of  non-resistance  for  a Christian, 
pointing  out  that  this  command  is  perfectly  clear,  and  is 
enjoined  upon  every  Christian  by  Christ  without  possibility 
of  misinterpretation.  “ Bethink  yourselves  whether  it  is 
righteous  to  obey  man  more  than  God,”  said  Peter  and 
John.  And  this  is  precisely  what  ought  to  be  the  attitude 
of  every  man  who  wishes  to  be  Christian  to  the  claim  on 
him  for  military  service,  when  Christ  has  said,  “ Resist  not 
evil  by  force.”  As  for  the  question  of  the  principle  itself, 


IS  WITHIN  you: 


25 


the  author  regards  that  as  decided.  As  to  the  second 
question,  whether  people  have  the  right  to  refuse  to  serve 
in  the  army  who  have  not  refused  the  benefits  conferred  by 
a government  resting  on  force,  the  author  considers  it  in 
detail,  and  arrives  at  the  conclusion  that  a Christian  follow- 
ing the  law  of  Christ,  since  he  does  not  go  to  war,  ought 
not  either  to  take  advantage  of  any  of  the  institutions  of 
government,  courts  of  law,  or  elections,  and  that  in  his 
private  concerns  he  must  not  have  recourse  to  the  authori- 
ties, the  police,  or  the  law.  Further  on  in  the  book  he 
treats  of  the  relation  of  the  Old  Testament  to  the  New,  the 
value  of  government  for  those  who  are  Christians,  and 
makes  some  observations  on  the  doctrine  of  non-resistance 
and  the  attacks  made  on  it.  The  author  concludes  his 
book  by  saying  : “ Christians  do  not  need  government,  and 
therefore  they  cannot  either  obey  it  in  what  is  contrary  to 
Christ’s  teaching  nor,  still  less,  take  part  in  it.”  Christ  took 
his  disciples  out  of  the  world,  he  says.  They  do  not  expect 
worldly  blessings  and  worldly  happiness,  but  they  expect 
eternal  life.  The  Spirit  in  whom  they  live  makes  them 
contented  and  happy  in  every  position.  If  the  world 
tolerates  them,  they  are  always  happy.  If  the  world  will 
not  leave  them  in  peace,  they  will  go  elsewhere,  since  they 
are  pilgrims  on  the  earth  and  they  have  no  fixed  place  of 
habitation.  They  believe  that  “the  dead  may  bury  their 
dead.”  One  thing  only  is  needful  for  them,  “ to  follow 
their  Master.” 

Even  putting  aside  the  question  as  to  the  principle  laid 
down  in  these  two  books  as  to  the  Christian’s  duty  in  his 
attitude  to  war,  one  cannot  help  perceiving  the  practical 
importance  and  the  urgent  need  of  deciding  the  ques- 
tion. 

There  are  people,  hundreds  of  thousands  of  Quakers, 
Mennonites,all  our  Douhobortsi,  Molokani,  and  others  who 
do  not  belong  to  any  definite  sect,  who  consider  that  the 


26 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


use  of  force — and,  consequently,  military  service — is  incon- 
sistent with  Christianity.  Consequently  there  are  every 
year  among  us  in  Russia  some  men  called  upon  for  military 
service  who  refuse  to  serve  on  the  ground  of  their  religious 
convictions.  Does  the  government  let  them  off  then?  No. 
Does  it  compel  them  to  go,  and  in  case  of  disobedience 
punish  them  ? No.  This  was  how  the  government 
treated  them  in  i8i8.  Here  is  an  extract  from  the  diary 
of  Nicholas  Myravyov  of  Kars,  which  was  not  passed  by 
the  censor,  and  is  not  known  in  Russia  : 

“Tiflis,  October  2,  1818. 

“ In  the  morning  the  commandant  told  me  that  five 
peasants  belonging  to  a landowner  in  the  Tamboff  govern- 
ment had  lately  been  sent  to  Georgia.  These  men  had 
been  sent  for  soldiers,  but  they  would  not  serve  ; they  had 
been  several  times  flogged  and  made  to  run  the  gauntlet, 
but  they  would  submit  readily  to  the  cruelest  tortures,  and 
even  to  death,  rather  than  serve.  ‘ Let  us  go,’  they  said, 
‘and  leave  us  alone  ; we  will  not  hurt  anyone  ; all  men  are 
equal,  and  the  Tzar  is  a man  like  us  ; why  should  we 
pay  him  tribute  ; why  should  I expose  my  life  to  danger 
to  kill  in  battle  some  man  who  has  done  me  no  harm  ? 
You  can  cut  us  to  pieces  and  we  will  not  be  soldiers. 
He  who  has  compassion  on  us  will  give  us  charity,  but  as 
for  the  government  rations,  we  have  not  had  them  and  we 
do  not  want  to  have  them.’  These  were  the  words  of  those 
peasants,  who  declare  that  there  are  numbers  like  them  in 
Russia.  They  brought  them  four  times  before  the  Com- 
mittee of  Ministers,  and  at  last  decided  to  lay  the  matter 
before  the  Tzar,  who  gave  orders  that  they  should  be  taken 
to  Georgia  for  correction,  and  commanded  the  commander- 
in-chief  to  send  him  a report  every  month  of  their 
gradual  success  in  bringing  these  peasants  to  a better 
mind.” 


IS  WITHIN  YOU: 


27 


How  the  correction  ended  is  not  known,  as  the  whole 
episode  indeed  was  unknown,^  having  been  kept  in  profound 
secrecy. 

This  was  how  the  government  behaved  seventy-five 
years  ago — this  is  how  it  has  behaved  in  a great  number  of 
cases,  studiously  concealed  from  the  people.  And  this  is 
how  the  government  behaves  now,  except  in  the  case  of  the 
German  Mennonites,  living  in  the  province  of  Kherson, 
whose  plea  against  military  service  is  considered  well 
grounded.  They  are  made  to  work  oflf  their  term  of  serv- 
ice in  labor  in  the  forests. 

But  in  the  recent  cases  of  refusal  on  the  part  of  Men- 
nonites to  serve  in  the  army  on  religious  grounds,  the 
government  authorities  have  acted  in  the  following 
manner  : 

To  begin  with,  they  have  recourse  to  every  means  of 
coercion  used  in  our  times  to  “ correct  ” the  culprit  and 
bring  him  to  “»a  better  mind,”  and  these  measures  are  car- 
ried out  with  the  greatest  secrecy.  I know  that  in  the  case 
of  one  man  who  declined  to  serve  in  1884  in  Moscow,  the 
official  correspondence  on  the  subject  had  two  months  after 
his  refusal  accumulated  into  a big  folio,  and  was  kept  ab- 
solutely secret  among  the  Ministry. 

They  usually  begin  by  sending  the  culprit  to  the  priests, 
and  the  latter,  to  their  shame  be  it  said,  always  exhort  him 
to  obedience.  But  since  the  exhortation  in  Christ’s  name 
to  forswear  Christ  is  for  the  most  part  unsuccessful,  after 
he  has  received  the  admonitions  of  the  spiritual  authorities, 
they  send  him  to  the  gendarmes,  and  the  latter,  finding,  as 
a rule,  no  political  cause  for  offense  in  him,  dispatch  him 
back  again,  and  then  he  is  sent  to  the  learned  men,  to  the 
doctors,  and  to  the  madhouse.  During  all  these  vicissitudes 
he  is  deprived  of  liberty  and  has  to  endure  every  kind  of 
humiliation  and  suffering  as  a convicted  criminal.  (All  this 
has  been  repeated  in  faur  cases.)  The  doctors  let  him  out 


28 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


of  the  madhouse,  and  then  every  kind  of  secret  shift  is  em- 
ployed to  prevent  him  from  going  free — whereby  others 
would  be  encouraged  to  refuse  to  serve  as  he  has  done — 
and  at  the  same  time  to  avoid  leaving  him  among  the 
soldiers,  for  fear  they  too  should  learn  from  him  that  mili- 
tary service  is  not  at  all  their  duty  by  the  law  of  God,  as 
they  are  assured,  but  quite  contrary  to  it. 

The  most  convenient  thing  for  the  government  would  be 
to  kill  the  non-resistant  by  flogging  him  to  death  or  some 
other  means,  as  was  done  in  former  days.  But  to  put  a 
man  openly  to  death  because  he  believes  in  the  creed  we 
all  confess  is  impossible.  To  let  a man  alone  who  has 
refused  obedience  is  also  impossible.  And  so  the  govern- 
ment tries  either  to  compel  the  man  by  ill-treatment  to 
renounce  Christ,  or  in  some  way  or  other  to  get  rid  of  him 
unobserved,  without  openly  putting  him  to  death,  and  to 
hide  somehow  both  the  action  and  the  man  himself  from 
other  people.  And  so  all  kinds  of  shifts  and  wiles  and  cruel- 
ties are  set  on  foot  against  him.  They  either  send  him  to 
the  frontier  or  provoke  him  to  insubordination,  and  then 
try  him  for  breach  of  discipline  and  shut  him  up  in  the 
prison  of  the  disciplinary  battalion,  where  they  can  ill  treat 
him  freely  unseen  by  anyone,  or  they  declare  him  mad,  and 
lock  him  up  in  a lunatic  asylum.  They  sent  one  man  in 
this  way  to  Tashkend — that  is,  they  pretended  to  transfer 
him  to  the  Tashkend  army  ; another  to  Omsk  ; a third 
they  convicted  of  insubordination  and  shut  up  in  prison  ; 
a fourth  they  sent  to  a lunatic  asylum. 

Everywhere  the  same  story  is  repeated.  Not  only  the 
government,  but  the  great  majority  of  liberal,  advanced 
people,  as  they  are  called,  studiously  turn  away  from  every- 
thing that  has  been  said,  written,  or  done,  or  is  being  done 
by  men  to  prove  the  incompatibility  of  force  in  its  most 
awful,  gross,  and  glaring  form — in  the  form,  that  is,  of  an 
army  of  soldiers  prepared  to  murder  anyone,  whoever  it 


IS  WITHIN  you. 


29 


may  be — with  the  teachings  of  Christianity,  or  even  of  the 
humanity  which  society  professes  as  its  creed. 

So  that  the  information  I have  gained  of  the  attitude  of 
the  higher  ruling  classes,  not  only  in  Russia  but  in  Europe 
and  America,  toward  the  elucidation  of  this  question  has 
convinced  me  that  there  exists  in  these  ruling  classes  a con- 
sciously hostile  attitude  to  true  Christianity,  which  is  shown 
pre-eminently  in  their  reticence  in  regard  to  all  manifesta- 
tions of  it. 


CHAPTER  II. 

CRITICISMS  OF  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  NON-RESISTANCE  TO 
EVIL  BY  FORCE  ON  THE  PART  OF  BELIEVERS  AND  OF 
UNBELIEVERS. 

Fate  of  the  Book  “ What  I Believe  ” — Evasive  Character  of  Religious 
Criticisms  of  Principles  of  my  Book — ist  Reply  : Use  of  P’orce  not 
Opposed  to  Christianity — 2d  Reply:  Use  of  Force  Necessary  to 
Restrain  Evil  Doers — 3d  Reply  : Duty  of  Using  Force  in  Defense  of 
One’s  Neighbor — 4th  Reply  : The  Breach  of  the  Command  of  Non- 
resistance  to  be  Regarded  Simply  as  a Weakness — 5th  Reply  : Reply 
Evaded  by  Making  Believe  that  the  Question  has  long  been  Decided 
— To  Devise  such  Subterfuges  and  to  take  Refuge  Behind  the  Author- 
ity of  the  Church,  of  Antiquity,  and  of  Religion  is  all  that  Ecclesias- 
tical Critics  can  do  to  get  out  of  the  Contradiction  between  Use  of 
Force  and  Christianity  in  Theory  and  in  Practice — General  Attitude 
of  the  Ecclesiastical  World  and  of  the  Authorities  to  Profession  of 
True  Christianity — General  Character  of  Russian  Freethinking  Critics 
— Foreign  Freethinking  Critics — Mistaken  Arguments  of  these  Critics 
the  Result  of  Misunderstanding  the  True  Meaning  of  Christ’s  Teaching. 

The  impression  I gained  of  a desire  to  conceal,  to  hush 
up,  what  I had  tried  to  express  in  my  book,  led  me  to  judge 
the  book  itself  afresh. 

On  its  appearance  it  had,  as  I had  anticipated,  been  for- 
bidden, and  ought  therefore  by  law  to  have  been  burnt. 
But,  at  the  same  time,  it  was  discussed  among  officials,  and 


3° 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


circulated  in  a great  number  of  manuscript  and  lithograph 
copies,  and  in  translations  printed  abroad. 

And  very  quickly  after  the  book,  criticisms,  both  religious 
and  secular  in  character,  made  their  appearance,  and  these 
the  government  tolerated,  and  even  encouraged.  So  that 
the  refutation  of  a book  which  no  one  was  supposed  to  know 
anything  about  was  even  chosen  as  the  subject  for  theolog- 
ical dissertations  in  the  academies. 

The  criticisms  of  my  book,  Russian  and  foreign  alike,  fall 
under  two  general  divisions — the  religious  criticisms  of  men 
who  regard  themselves  as  believers,  and  secular  criticisms, 
that  is,  those  of  freethinkers. 

I will  begin  with  the  first  class.  In  my  book  I made  it  an 
accusation  against  the  teachers  of  the  Church  that  their 
teaching  is  opposed  to  Christ’s  commands  clearly  and  defi- 
nitely expressed  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  and  opposed 
in  especial  to  his  command  in  regard  to  resistance  to  evil, 
and  that  in  this  way  they  deprive  Christ’s  teaching  of  all 
value.  The  Church  authorities  accept  the  teaching  of  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount  on  non-resistance  to  evil  by  force  as 
divine  revelation;  and  therefore  one  would  have  thought 
that  if  they  felt  called  upon  to  write  about  my  book  at  all, 
they  would  have  found  it  inevitable  before  everything  else 
to  reply  to  the  principal  point  of  my  charge  against  them, 
and  to  say  plainly,  do  they  or  do  they  not  admit  the  teach- 
ing of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  and  the  commandment  of 
non-resistance  to  evil  as  binding  on  a Christian.  And  they 
were  bound  to  answer  this  question,  not  after  the  usual 
fashion  (/.  e.,  “that  although  on  the  one  side  one  cannot 
absolutely  deny,  yet  on  the  other  side  one  cannot  again  fully 
assent,  all  the  more  seeing  that,’’  etc.,  etc.).  No;  they 
should  have  answered  the  question  as  plainly  as  it  was  put 
in  my  book — Did  Christ  really  demand  from  his  disciples 
that  they  should  carry  out  what  he  taught  them  in  the  Ser- 
mon on  the  Mount?  And  can  a Christian,  then,  or  can  he 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


31 


not,  always  remaining  a Christian,  go  to  law  or  make  any 
use  of  the  law,  or  seek  his  own  protection  in  the  law?  And 
can  the  Christian,  or  can  he  not,  remaining  a Christian,  take 
part  in  the  administration  of  government,  using  compulsion 
against  his  neighbors?  And — the  most  important  question 
hanging  over  the  heads  of  all  of  us  in  these  days  of  universal 
military  service — can  the  Christian,  or  can  he  not,  remain- 
ing a Christian,  against  Christ’s  direct  prohibition,  promise 
obedience  in  future  actions  directly  opposed  to  his  teaching? 
And  can  he,  by  taking  his  share  of  service  in  the  army,  pre- 
pare himself  to  murder  men,  and  even  actually  murder  them? 

These  questions  were  put  plainly  and  directly,  and  seemed 
to  require  a plain  and  direct  answer ; but  in  all  the  criti- 
cisms of  my  book  there  was  no  such  plain  and  direct  answer. 
No;  my  book  received  precisely  the  same  treatment  as  all 
the  attacks  upon  the  teachers  of  the  Church  for  their  defec- 
tion from  the  Law  of  Christ  of  which  history  from  the  days 
of  Constantine  is  full. 

A very  great  deal  was  said  in  connection  with  my  book 
of  my  having  incorrectly  interpreted  this  and  other  passages 
of  the  Gospel,  of  my  being  in  error  in  not  recognizing  the 
Trinity,  the  redemption,  and  the  immortality  of  the  soul.  A 
very  great  deal  was  said,  but  not  a word  about  the  one  thing 
which  for  every  Christian  is  the  most  essential  question  in 
life — how  to  reconcile  the  duty  of  forgiveness,  meekness, 
patience,  and  love  for  all,  neighbors  and  enemies  alike, 
which  is  so  clearly  expressed  in  the  words  of  our  teacher, 
and  in  the  heart  of  each  of  us — how  to  reconcile  this  duty 
with  the  obligation  of  using  force  in  war  upon  men  of  our 
own  or  a foreign  people. 

All  that  are  worth  calling  answers  to  this  question  can  be 
brought  under  the  following  five  heads.  I have  tried  to 
bring  together  in  this  connection  all  I could,  not  only  from 
the  criticisms  on  my  book,  but  from  what  has  been  written 
in  past  times  on  this  theme. 


32 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


The  first  and  crudest  form  of  reply  consists  in  the  bold 
assertion  that  the  use  of  force  is  not  opposed  by  the  teach- 
ing of  Christ;  that  it  is  permitted,  and  even  enjoined,  on 
the  Christian  by  the  Old  and  New  Testaments. 

Assertions  of  this  kind  proceed,  for  the  most  part,  from 
men  who  have  attained  the  highest  ranks  in  the  governing 
or  ecclesiastical  hierarchy,  and  who  are  consequently  per- 
fectly assured  that  no  one  will  dare  to  contradict  their  asser- 
tion, and  that  if  anyone  does  contradict  it  they  will  hear 
nothing  of  the  contradiction.  These  men  have,  for  the 
most  part,  through  the  intoxication  of  power,  so  lost  the 
right  idea  of  what  that  Christianity  is  in  the  name  of  which 
they  hold  their  position  that  what  is  Christian  in  Chris- 
tianity presents  itself  to  them  as  heresy,  while  everything  in 
the  Old  and  New  Testaments  which  can  be  distorted  into  an 
antichristian  and  heathen  meaning  they  regard  as  the  foun- 
dation of  Christianity.  In  support  of  their  assertion  that 
Christianity  is  not  opposed  to  the  use  of  force,  these  men 
usually,  with  the  greatest  audacity,  bring  together  all  the 
most  obscure  passages  from  the  Old  and  New  Testaments, 
interpreting  them  in  the  most  unchristian  way — the  punish- 
ment of  Ananias  and  Sapphira,  of  Simon  the  Sorcerer,  etc. 
They  quote  all  those  sayings  of  Christ’s  which  can  possibly 
be  interpreted  as  justification  of  cruelty:  the  expulsion  from 
the  Temple;  “It  shall  be  more  tolerable  for  the  land  of 
Sodom  than  for  this  city,’’  etc.,  etc.  According  to  these 
people’s  notions,  a Christian  government  is  not  in  the  least 
bound  to  be  guided  by  the  spirit  of  peace,  forgiveness  of 
injuries,  and  love  for  enemies. 

To  refute  such  an  assertion  is  useless,  because  the  very 
people  who  make  this  assertion  refute  themselves,  or,  rather, 
renounce  Christ,  inventing  a Christianity  and  a Christ  of 
their  own  in  the  place  of  him  in  whose  name  the  Church 
itself  exists,  as  well  as  their  office  in  it.  If  all  men  were  to 
learn  that  the  Church  professes  to  believe  in  a Christ  of 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


33 


punishment  and  warfare,  not  of  forgiveness,  no  one  would 
believe  in  the  Church  and  it  could  not  prove  to  anyone  what 
it  is  trying  to  prove. 

The  second,  somewhat  less  gross,  form  of  argument  con- 
sists in  declaring  that,  though  Christ  did  indeed  preach  that 
we  should  turn  the  left  cheek,  and  give  the  .cloak  also,  and 
this  is  the  highest  moral  duty,  yet  that  there  are  wicked 
men  in  the  world,  and  if  these  wicked  men  were  not 
restrained  by  force,  the  whole  world  and  all  good  men  would 
come  to  ruin  through  them.  This  argument  I found  for  the 
first  time  in  John  Chrysostom,  and  I show  how  he  is  mis- 
taken in  my  book  “What  I Believe.’’ 

This  argument  is  ill  grounded,  because  if  we  allow  our- 
selves to  regard  any  men  as  intrinsically  wicked  men,  then 
in  the  first  place  we  annul,  by  so  doing,  the  whole  idea  of 
the  Christian  teaching,  according  to  which  we  are  all  equals 
and  brothers,  as  sons  of  one  Father  in  heaven.  Secondly, 
it  is  ill  founded,  because  even  if  to  use  force  against  wicked 
men  had  been  permitted  by  God,  since  it  is  impossible  to 
find  a perfect  and  unfailing  distinction  by  which  one  could 
positively  know  the  wicked  from  the  good,  so  it  would  come 
to  all  individual  men  and  societies  of  men  mutually  regard- 
ing each  other  as  wicked  men,  as  is  the  ca,se  now.  Thirdly, 
even  if  it  were  possible  to  distinguish  the  wicked  from  the 
good  unfailingly,  even  then  it  would  be  impossible  to  kill  or 
injure  or  shut  up  in  prison  these  wicked  men,  because  there 
would  be  no  one  in  a Christian  society  to  carry  out  such 
punishment,  since  every  Christian,  as  a Christian,  has  been 
commanded  to  use  no  force  against  the  wicked. 

The  third  kind  of  answer,  still  more  subtle  than  the  pre- 
ceding, consists  in  asserting  that  though  the  command  of 
non-resistance  to  evil  by  force  is  binding  on  the  Christian 
when  the  evil  is  directed  against  himself  personally,  it  ceases 
to  be  binding  when  the  evil  is  directed  against  his  neigh- 
bors, and  that  then  the  Christian  is  not  only  not  bound  to 


34 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


fulfill  the  commandment,  but  is  even  bound  to  act  in  oppo- 
sition to  it  in  defense  of  his  neighbors,  and  to  use  force 
against  transgressors  by  force.  This  assertion  is  an  abso- 
lute assumption,  and  one  cannot  find  in  all  Christ’s  teaching 
any  confirmation  of  such  an  argument.  Such  an  argument 
is  not  only  a limitation,  but  a direct  contradiction  and  nega- 
tion of  the  commandment.  If  every  man  has  the  right  to 
have  recourse  to  force  in  face  of  a danger  threatening  an- 
other, the  question  of  the  use  of  force  is  reduced  to  a ques- 
tion of  the  definition  of  danger  for  another.  If  my  private 
judgment  is  to  decide  the  question  of  what  is  danger  for 
another,  there  is  no  occasion  for  the  use  of  force  which 
could  not  be  justified  on  the  ground  of  danger  threatening 
some  other  man.  They  killed  and  burnt  witches,  they 
killed  aristocrats  and  girondists,  they  killed  their  enemies, 
because  those  who  were  in  authority  regarded  them  as  dan- 
gerous for  the  people. 

If  this  important  limitation,  which  fundamentally  under- 
mines the  whole  value  of  the  commandment,  had  entered 
into  Christ’s  meaning,  there  must  have  been  mention  of  it 
somewhere.  This  restriction  is  made  nowhere  in  our 
Saviour’s  life  or  preaching.  On  the  contrary,  warning  is 
given  precisely  against  this  treacherous  and  scandalous 
restriction  which  nullifies  the  commandment.  The  error 
and  impossibility  of  such  a limitation  is  shown  in  the  Gospel 
with  special  clearness  in  the  account  of  the  judgment  of 
Caiaphas,  who  makes  precisely  this  distinction.  He 
acknowledged  that  it  was  wrong  to  punish  the  innocent 
Jesus,  but  he  saw  in  him  a source  of  danger  not  for  himself, 
but  for  the  whole  people,  and  therefore  he  said:  It  is  better 
for  one  man  to  die,  that  the  whole  people  perish  not.  And 
the  erroneousness  of  such  a limitation  is  still  more  clearly 
expressed  in  the  words  spoken  to  Peter  w'hen  he  tried  to 
resist  by  force  evil  directed  against  Jesus  (Matt.  xxvi.  52). 
Peter  was  not  defending  himself,  but  his  beloved  and 


IS  WITHIN-  YOU. 


35 


heavenly  Master,  And  Christ  at  once  reproved  him  for 
this,  saying,  that  he  who  takes  up  the  sword  shall  perish  by 
the  sword. 

Besides,  apologies  for  violence  used  against  one’s  neighbor 
in  defense  of  another  neighbor  from  greater  violence  are 
always  untrustworthy,  because  when  force  is  used  against 
one  who  has  not  yet  carried  out  his  evil  intent,  I can  never 
know  which  would  be  greater — the  evil  of  my  act  of  violence 
or  of  the  act  I want  to  prevent.  We  kill  the  criminal  that 
society  may  be  rid  of  him,  and  we  never  know  whether  the 
criminal  of  to-day  would  not  have  been  a changed  man  to- 
morrow, and  whether  our  punishment  of  him  is  not  useless 
cruelty.  We  shut  up  the  dangerous — as  we  think — mem- 
ber of  society,  but  the  next  day  this  man  might  cease  to  be 
dangerous  and  his  imprisonment  might  be  for  nothing.  I 
see  that  a man  I know  to  be  a ruffian  is  pursuing  a young 
girl.  I have  a gun  in  my  hand — I kill  the  ruffian  and  save 
the  girl.  But  the  death  or  the  wounding  of  the  ruffian  has 
positively  taken  place,  while  what  would  have  happened  if 
this  had  not  been  I cannot  know.  And  what  an  immense 
mass  of  evil  must  result,  and  indeed  does  result,  from  allow- 
ing men  to  assume  the  right  of  anticipating  what  may  happen. 
Ninety-nine  per  cent,  of  the  evil  of  the  world  is  founded  on 
this  reasoning— from  the  Inquisition  to  dynamite  bombs, 
and  the  executions  or  punishments  of  tens  of  thousands  of 
political  criminals. 

A fourth,  still  more  refined,  reply  to  the  question.  What 
ought  to  be  the  Christian’s  attitude  to  Christ's  command  of 
non-resistance  to  evil  by  force?  consists  in  declaring  that 
they  do  not  deny  the  command  of  non-resistance  to  evil, 
but  recognize  it ; but  they  only  do  not  ascribe  to  this  com- 
mand the  special  exclusive  value  attached  to  it  by  sectarians. 
To  regard  this  command  as  the  indispensable  condition  of 
Christian  life,  as  Garrison,  Ballou,  Dymond,  the  Quakers, 
the  Mennonites,  and  the  Shakers  do  now,  and  as  the  Moravian 


36 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


brothers,  the  Waldenses,  the  Albigenses,  the  Bogomilites, 
and  the  Paulicians  did  in  the  past,  is  a one-sided  heresy. 
This  command  has  neither  more  nor  less  value  than  all  the 
other  commands,  and  the  man  who  through  weakness  trans- 
gresses any  command  whatever,  the  command  of  non-resist- 
ance included,  does  not  cease  to  be  a Christian  if  he  hold  the 
true  faith.  This  is  a very  skillful  device,  and  many  people 
who  wish  to  be  deceived  are  easily  deceived  by  it.  The 
device  consists  in  reducing  a direct  conscious  denial  of  a 
command  to  a casual  breach  of  it.  But  one  need  only  com- 
pare the  attitude  of  the  teachers  of  the  Church  to  this  and 
to  other  commands  which  they  really  do  recognize,  to  be 
convinced  that  their  attitude  to  this  is  completely  different 
from  their  attitude  to  other  duties. 

The  command  against  fornication  they  do  really  recognize, 
and  consequently  they  do  not  admit  that  in  any  case  forni- 
cation can  cease  to  be  wrong.  The  Church  preachers  never 
point  out  cases  in  which  the  command  against  fornication 
can  be  broken,  and  always  teach  that  we  must  avoid  seduc- 
tions which  lead  to  temptation  to  fornication.  But  not  so 
with  the  command  of  non-resistance.  All  church  preachers 
recognize  cases  in  which  that  command  can  be  broken,  and 
teach  the  people  accordingly.  And  they  not  only  do  not 
teach  that  we  should  avoid  temptations  to  break  it,  chief  of 
which  is  the  military  oath,  but  they  themselves  administer 
it.  The  preachers  of  the  Church  never  in  any  other  case 
advocate  the  breaking  of  any  other  commandment.  But  in 
connection  with  the  commandment  of  non-resistance  they 
openly  teach  that  we  must  not  understand  it  too  literally, 
but  that  there  are  conditions  and  circumstances  in  w'hich  we 
must  do  the  direct  opposite,  that  is,  go  to  law,  fight,  punish. 
So  that  occasions  for  fulfilling  the  commandment  of  non- 
resistance  to  evil  by  force  are  taught  for  the  most  part  as 
occasions  for  not  fulfilling  it.  The  fulfillment  of  this  com- 
mand, they  say,  is  very  difficult  and  pertains  only  to  per- 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


37 


fection.  And  how  can  it  not  be  difficult,  when  the  breach 
of  it  is  not  only  not  forbidden,  but  law  courts,  prisons,  can- 
nons, guns,  armies,  and  wars  are  under  the  immediate  sanc- 
tion of  the  Church?  It  cannot  be  true,  then,  that  this 
command  is  recognized  by  the  preachers  of  the  Church  as 
on  a level  with  other  commands. 

The  preachers  of  the  Church  clearly  do  not  recognize  it; 
only  not  daring  to  acknowledge  this,  they  try  to  conceal 
their  not  recognizing  it. 

So  much  for  the  fourth  reply. 

The  fifth  kind  of  answer,  which  is  the  subtlest,  the  most 
often  used,  and  the  most  effective,  consists  in  avoiding 
answering,  in  making  believe  that  this  question  is  one  which 
has  long  ago  been  decided  perfectly  clearly  and  satisfac- 
torily, and  that  it  is  not  worth  while  to  talk  about  it.  This 
method  of  reply  is  employed  by  all  the  more  or  less  culti- 
vated religious  writers,  that  is  to  say,  those  who  feel  the 
laws  of  Christ  binding  for  themselves.  Knowing  that  the 
contradiction  existing  between  the  teaching  of  Christ  which 
we  profess  with  our  lips  and  the  whole  order  of  our  lives 
cannot  be  removed  by  words,  and  that  touching  upon  it  can 
only  make  it  more  obvious,  they,  with  more  or  less  ingenuity, 
evade  it,  pretending  that  the  question  of  reconciling  Chris- 
tianity with  the  use  of  force  has  been  decided  already,  or 
does  not  exist  at  all.* 

The  majority  of  religious  critics  of  my  book  use  this  fifth 
method  of  replying  to  it.  I could  quote  dozens  of  such 

* I only  know  one  work  which  differs  somewhat  from  this  general 
definition,  and  that  is  not  a criticism  in  the  precise  meaning  of  the  word, 
but  an  article  treating  of  the  same,  subject  and  having  my  book  in  view. 
I mean  the  pamphlet  of  Mr.  Troizky  (published  at  Kazan),  “A  Sermon  for 
the  People.”  The  author  obviously  accepts  Christ’s  teaching  in  its  true 
meaning.  Ke  says  that  the  prohibition  of  resistance  to  evil  by  force 
means  exactly  what  it  does  mean  ; and  the  same  with  the  prohibition  of 
swearing.  Pie  does  not,  as  others  do,  deny  the  meaning  of  Christ’s 


38 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


critics,  in  all  of  whom,  without  exception,  we  find  the  same 
thing  repeated:  everything  is  discussed  except  what  consti- 
tutes the  principal  subject  of  the  book.  As  a characteristic 
example  of  such  criticisms,  I will  quote  the  article  of  a well- 
known  and  ingenious  English  writer  and  preacher' — Farrar — 
who,  like  many  learned  theologians,  is  a great  master  of  the 
art  of  circuitously  evading  a question.  The  article  was  pub- 
lished in  an  American  journal,  the  Foru7n^  in  Ocober,  1888. 

After  conscientiously  explaining  in  brief  the  contents  of 
my  book,  Farrar  says:  “Tolstoy  came  to  the  conclusion  that 
a coarse  deceit  had  been  palmed  upon  the  world  when  these 
words,  ‘Resist  not  evil,’  were  held  by  civil  society  to  be 
compatible  with  war,  courts  of  justice,  capital  punishment, 
divorce,  oaths,  national  prejudice,  and,  indeed,  with  most 
of  the  institutions  of  civil  and  social  life.  He  now  believes 
that  the  kingdom  of  God  would  come  if  all  men  kept  these 
five  commandments  of  Christ,  viz.:  i.  Five  in  peace  with 
all  men.  2.  Be  pure.  3.  Take  no  oaths.  4.  Resist  not 
evil.  5.  Renounce  national  distinctions. 

“Tolstoy,”  he  says,  “rejects  the  inspiration  of  the  Old 
Testament;  hence  he  rejects  the  chief  doctrines  of  the 
Church — that  of  the  Atonement  by  blood,  the  Trinity,  the 
descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost  on  the  Apostles,  and  his  trans- 
mission through  the  priesthood.”  And  he  recognizes  only 
the  words  and  commands  of  Christ.  “But  is  this  interpre- 
tation of  Christ  a true  one?”  he  says.  “Are  all  men  bound 
to  act  as  Tolstoy  teaches— f.  e.,  to  carry  out  these  five  corn- 

teaching,  but  unfortunately  he  does  not  draw  from  this  admission  the 
inevitable  deductions  which  present  themselves  spontaneously  in  our  life 
when  we  understand  Christ’s  teaching  in  that  way.  If  we  must  not 
oppose  evil  by  force,  nor  swear,  everyone  naturally  asks,  “ How,  then, 
about  military  service  ? and  the  oath  of  obedience  ? ” To  this  question 
the  author  gives  no  reply  ; but  it  must  be  answered.  And  if  he  cannot 
answer,  then  he  would  do  better  not  to  speak  on  the  subject  at  all,  as 
such  silence  leads  to  error. 


IS  WITHIiV  YOU." 


39 


raandments  of  Christ?”  You  expect,  then,  that  in  answer 
to  this  essential  question,  which  is  the  only  one  that  could 
induce  a man  to  write  an  article  about  the  book,  he  will  say 
either  that  this  interpretation  of  Christ’s  teaching  is  true 
and  we  ought  to  follow  it,  or  he  will  say  that  such  an  inter- 
pretation is  untrue,  will  show  why,  and  will  give  some  other 
correct  interpretation  of  those  words  which  I interpret  incor- 
rectly. But  nothing  of  the  kind  is  done.  Farrar  only 
expresses  his  “belief”  that,  ‘‘though  actuated  by  the  noblest 
sincerity.  Count  Tolstoy  has  been  misled  by  partial  and  one- 
sided interpretations  of  the  meaning  of  the  Gospel  and  the 
mind  and  will  of  Christ.”  What  this  error  consists  in  is 
not  made  clear;  it  is  only  said:  ‘‘To  enter  into  the  proof  of 
this  is  impossible  in  this  article,  for  I have  already  exceeded 
the  space  at  my  command.” 

And  he  concludes,  in  a tranquil  spirit: 

‘‘Meanwhile,  the  reader  who  feels  troubled  lest  it  should 
be  his  duty  also  to  forsake  all  the  conditions  of  his  life  and 
to  take  up  the  position  and  work  of  a common  laborer,  may 
rest  for  the  present  on  the  principle,  securiis  judicat  orbis 
terrarum.  With  few  and  rare  exceptions,”  he  continues, 
“the  whole  of  Christendom,  from  the  days  of  the  Apostles 
down  to  our  own,  has  come  to  the  firm  conclusion  that  it 
was  the  object  of  Christ  to  lay  down  great  eternal  principles, 
but  not  to  disturb  the  bases  and  revolutionize  the  institu- 
tions of  all  human  society,  which  themselves  rest  on  divine 
sanctions  as  well  as  on  inevitable  conditions.  Were  it  my 
object  to  prove  how  untenable  is  the  doctrine  of  communism, 
based  by  Count  Tolstoy  upon  the  divine  paradoxes  [jzV], 
which  can  be  interpreted  only  on  historical  principles  in 
accordance  with  the  whole  method  of  the  teaching  of  Jesus, 
it  would  require  an  ampler  canvas  than  I have  here  at  my 
disposal.”  What  a pity  he  has  not ‘‘an  ampler  canvas  at 
his  disposal”  ! And  what  a strange  thing  it  is  that  for  all 
these  last  fifteen  centuries  no  one  has  had  ‘‘a  canvas  ample 


40 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


enough”  to  prove  that  Christ,  whom  vve  profess  to  believe 
in,  says  something  utterly  unlike  what  he  does  say!  Still, 
they  could  prove  it  if  they  wanted  to.  But  it  is  not  worth 
while  to  prove  what  everyone  knows;  it  is  enough  to  say, 
"securus  jiidicat  or  bis  terrarum." 

And  of  this  kind,  without  exception,  are  all  the  criticisms 
of  educated  believers,  who  must,  as  such,  understand  the 
danger  of  their  position.  The  sole  escape  from  it  for  them 
lies  in  their  hope  that  they  may  be  able,  by  using  the 
authority  of  the  Church,  of  antiquity,  and  of  their  sacred 
office,  to  overawe  the  reader  and  draw  him  away  from  the 
idea  of  reading  the  Gospel  for  himself  and  thinking  out  the 
question  in  his  own  mind  for  himself.  And  in  this  they  are 
successful;  for,  indeed,  how  could  the  notion  occur  to  any- 
one that  all  that  has  been  repeated  from  century  to  century 
with  such  earnestness  and  solemnity  by  all  those  arch- 
deacons, bishops,  archbishops,  holy  synods,  and  popes,  is 
all  of  it  a base  lie  and  a calumny  foisted  upon  Christ  by 
them  for  the  sake  of  keeping  safe  the  money  they  must  have 
to  live  luxuriously  on  the  necks  of  other  men?  And  it  is  a 
lie  and  a calumny  so  transparent  that  the  only  way  of  keep- 
ing it  up  consists  in  overawing  people  by  their  earnestness, 
their  conscientiousness.  It  is  just  what  has  taken  place  of 
late  years  at  recruiting  sessions;  at  a table  before  the  zert- 
zal — the  symbol  of  the  Tzar’s  authority — in  the  seat  of 
honor  under  the  life-size  portrait  of  the  Tzar,  sit  dignified 
old  officials,  wearing  decorations,  conversing  freely  and 
easily,  writing  notes,  summoning  men  before  them,  and  giv- 
ing orders.  Here,  wearing  a cross  on  his  breast,  near  them, 
is  a prosperous-looking  old  priest  in  a silken  cassock,  with 
long  gray  hair  flowing  on  to  his  cope,  before  a lectern  who 
wears  the  golden  cross  and  has  a Gospel  bound  in  gold. 

They  summon  Ivan  Petroff.  A young  man  comes  in, 
wretchedly,  shabbily  dressed,  and  in  terror,  the  muscles  of 
his  face  working,  his  eyes  bright  and  restless;  and  in  a 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


41 


broken  voice,  hardly  above  a whisper,  he  says;  “I — by 
Christ’s  law — as  a Christian — I cannot.”  ‘‘What  is  he 
muttering?”  asks  the  president,  frowning  impatiently 
and  raising  his  eyes  from  his  book  to  listen.  ‘‘Speak 
louder,”  the  colonel  with  shining  epaulets  shouts  to  him. 

‘‘I — I as  a Christian ” And  at  last  it  appears  that  the 

young  man  refuses  to  serve  in  the  army  because  he  is  a 
Christian.  ‘‘Don’t  talk  nonsense.  Stand  to  be  measured. 
Doctor,  may  I trouble  you  to  measure  him.  He  is  all 
right?”  “Yes.”  ‘‘Reverend  father,  administer  the  oath 
to  him.” 

No  one  is  the  least  disturbed  by  what  the  poor  scared 
young  man  is  muttering.  They  do  not  even  pay  attention 
to  it.  ‘‘They  all  mutter  something,  but  we’ve  no  time  to 
listen  to  it,  we  have  to  enroll  so  many.” 

The  recruit  tries  to  say  something  still.  ‘‘It’s  opposed  to 
the  law  of  Christ.”  ‘‘Go  along,  go  along;  we  know  without 
your  help  what  is  opposed  to  the  law  and  what’s  not;  and 
you  soothe  his  mind,  reverend  father,  soothe  him.  Next; 
Vassily  Nikitin.”  And  they  lead  the  trembling  youth  aw’ay. 
And  it  does  not  strike  anyone — the  guards,  or  Vassily  Niki- 
tin, whom  they  are  bringing  in,  or  any  of  the  spectators  of 
this  scene — that  these  inarticulate  words  of  the  young  man, 
at  once  suppressed  by  the  authorities,  contain  the  truth,  and 
that  the  loud,  solemnly  uttered  sentences  of  the  calm,  self- 
confident  official  and  the  priest  are  a lie  and  a decep- 
tion. 

Such  is  the  impression  produced  not  only  by  Farrar’s 
article,  but  by  all  those  solemn  sermons,  articles,  and  books 
which  make  their  appearance  from  all  sides  directly  there  is 
anywhere  a glimpse  of  truth  expo.sing  a predominant  false- 
hood. At  once  begins  the  series  of  long,  clever,  ingenious, 
and  solemn  speeches  and  writings,  which  deal  with  ques- 
tions nearly  related  to  the  subject,  but  skillfully  avoid 
touching  the  subject  itself. 


42 


“ THE  KIHGDOM  OF  GOD 


That  is  the  essence  of  the  fifth  and  most  effective  means 
of  getting  out  of  the  contradictions  in  which  Church  Chris- 
tianity has  placed  itself,  by  professing  its  faith  in  Christ’s 
teaching  in  words,  while  it  denies  it  in  its  life,  and  teaches 
people  to  do  the  same. 

Those  who  justify  themselves  by  the  first  method,  directly, 
crudely  asserting  that  Christ  sanctioned  violence,  wars,  and 
murder,  repudiate  Christ’s  doctrine  directly;  those  who  find 
their  defense  in  the  second,  the  third,  or  the  fourth  method 
are  confused  and  can  easily  be  convicted  of  error;  but  this 
last  class,  who  do  not  argue,  who  do  not  condescend  to 
argue  about  it,  but  take  shelter  behind  their  own  grandeur, 
and  make  a show  of  all  this  having  been  decided  by  them  or 
at  least  by  someone  long  ago,  and  no  longer  offering  a possi- 
bility of  doubt  to  anyone — they  seem  safe  from  attack,  and 
will  be  beyond  attack  till  men  come  to  realize  that  they  are 
under  the  narcotic  influence  exerted  on  them  by  govern- 
ments and  churches,  and  are  no  longer  affected  by  it. 

Such  was  the  attitude  of  the  spiritual  critics — i.  e.,  those 
professing  faith  in  Christ — to  my  book.  And  their  attitude 
could  not  have  been  different.  They  are  bound  to  take  up 
this  attitude  by  the  contradictory  position  in  which  they  find 
themselves  between  belief  in  the  divinity  of  their  Master  and 
disbelief  in  his  clearest  utterances,  and  they  want  to  escape 
from  this  contradiction.  So  that  one  cannot  expect  from 
them  free  discussion  of  the  very  essence  of  the  question — 
that  is,  of  the  change  in  men’s  life  which  must  result  from 
applying  Christ’s  teaching  to  the  existing  order  of  the  world. 
Such  free  discussion  I only  expected-  from  worldly,  free- 
thinking  critics  who  are  not  bound  to  Christ’s  teaching  in 
any  way,  and  can  therefore  take  an  independent  view  of  it. 
I had  anticipated  that  freethinking  writers  would  look  at 
Christ,  not  merely,  like  the  Churchmen,  as  the  founder  of 
a religion  of  personal  salvation,  but,  to  express  it  in  their 
language,  as  a reformer  who  laid  down  new  principles  of  life 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


43 


and  destroyed  the  old,  and  whose  reforms  are  not  yet  com- 
plete, but  are  still  in  progress  even  now. 

Such  a view  of  Christ  and  his  teaching  follows  from  my 
book.  But  to  my  astonishment,  out  of  the  great  number  of 
critics  of  my  book  there  was  not  one,  either  Russian  or  for- 
eign, who  treated  the  subject  from  the  side  from  which  it 
was  approached  in  the  book — that  is,  who  criticised  Christ’s 
doctrines  as  philosophical,  moral,  and  social  principles,  to 
use  their  scientific  expressions.  This  was  not  done  in  a 
single  criticism.  The  freethinking  Russian  critics  taking 
my  book  as  though  its  whole  contents  could  be  reduced  to 
non-resistance  to  evil,  and  understanding  the  doctrine  of 
non-resistance  to  evil  itself  (no  doubt  for  greater  con- 
venience in  refuting  it)  as  though  it  would  prohibit  every 
kind  of  conflict  with  evil,  fell  vehemently  upon  this  doctrine, 
and  for  some  years  past  have  been  very  successfully  proving 
that  Christ’s  teaching  is  mistaken  in  so  far  as  it  forbids 
resistance  to  evil.  Their  refutations  of  this  hypothetical 
doctrine  of  Christ  were  all  the  more  successful  since  they 
knew  beforehand  that  their  arguments  could  not  be  contested 
or  corrected,  for  the  censorship,  not  having  passed  the  book, 
did  not  pass  articles  in  its  defense. 

It  is  a remarkable  thing  that  among  us,  where  one  cannot 
say  a word  about  the  Holy  Scriptures  without  the  prohibi- 
tion of  the  censorship,  for  some  years  past  there  have  been 
in  all  the  journals  constant  attacks  and  criticisms  on  the 
command  of  Christ  simply  and  directly  stated  in  Matt.  v.  39, 
The  Russian  advanced  critics,  obviously  unaware  of  all  that 
has  been  done  to  elucidate  the  question  of  non-resistance, 
and  sometimes  even  imagining  apparently  that  the  rule  of 
non-resistance  to  evil  had  been  invented  by  me  personally, 
fell  foul  of  the  very  idea  of  it.  They  opposed  it  and 
attacked  it,  and  advancing  with  great  heat  arguments  which 
had  long  ago  been  analyzed  and  refuted  from  every  point  of 
view,  they  demonstrated  that  a man  ought  invariably  to 


44 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


defend  (with  violence)  all  the  injured  and  oppressed,  and 
that  thus  the  doctrine  of  non-resistance  to  evil  is  an  immoral 
doctrine. 

To  all  Russian  critics  the  whole  import  of  Christ’s  com- 
mand seemed  reducible  to  the  fact  that  it  would  hinder  them 
from  the  active  opposition  to  evil  to  which  they  are  accus- 
tomed. So  that  the  principle  of  non-resistance  to  evil  by 
force  has  been  attacked  by  two  opposing  camps:  the  con- 
servatives, because  this  principle  would  hinder  their  activity 
in  resistance  to  evil  as  applied  to  the  revolutionists,  in  per- 
secution and  punishment  of  them ; the  revolutionists,  too, 
because  this  principle  would  hinder  their  resistance  to  evil 
as  applied  to  the  conservatives  and  the  overthrowing  of 
them.  The  conservatives  were  indignant  at  the  doctrine  of 
non-resistance  to  evil  by  force  hindering  the  energetic 
destruction  of  the  revolutionary  elements,  which  may  ruin 
the  national  prosperity;  the  revolutionists  were  indignant  at 
the  doctrine  of  non-resistance  to  evil  by  force  hindering  the 
overthrow  of  the  conservatives,  who  are  ruining  the  national 
prosperity.  It  is  worthy  of  remark  in  this  connection  that 
the  revolutionists  have  attacked  the  principle  of  non- 
resistance  to  evil  by  force,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  it  is  the 
greatest  terror  and  danger  for  every  despotism.  For  ever 
since  the  beginning  of  the  world,  the  use  of  violence  of  every 
kind,  from  the  Inquisition  to  the  Schlusselburg  fortress,  has 
rested  and  still  rests  on  the  opposite  principle  of  the  neces- 
sity of  resisting  evil  by  force. 

Besides  this,  the  Russian  critics  have  pointed  out  the  fact 
that  the  application  of  the  command  of  non-resistance  to 
practical  life  would  turn  mankind  aside  out  of  the  path  of 
civilization  along  which  it  is  moving.  The  path  of  civiliza- 
tion on  which  mankind  in  Europe  is  moving  is  in  their 
opinion  the  one  along  which  all  mankind  ought  always  to 
move. 

So  much  for  the  general  character  of  the  Russian  critics. 


75  WITHIN  YOU." 


45 


Foreign  critics  started  from  the  same  premises,  but  their 
discussions  of  my  book  were  somewhat  different  from  those 
of  Russian  critics,  not  only  in  being  less  bitter,  and  in 
showing  more  culture,  but  even  in  the  subject-matter. 

In  discussing  my  book  and  the  Gospel  teaching  gener- 
ally, as  it  is  expressed  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  the  for- 
eign critics  maintained  that  such  doctrine  is  not  peculiarly 
Christian  (Christian  doctrine  is  either  Catholicism  or  Prot- 
estantism according  to  their  views) — the  teaching  of  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount  is  only  a string  of  very  pretty  imprac- 
ticable dreams  du  channant  docteur.,  as  Renan  says,  fit  for 
the  simple  and  half-savage  inhabitants  of  Galilee  who  lived 
eighteen  hundred  years  ago,  and  for  the  half-savage 
Russian  peasants — Sutaev  and  Bondarev — and  the  Russian 
mystic  Tolstoy,  but  not  at  all  consistent  with  a high  degree 
of  European  culture. 

The  foreign  freethinking  critics  have  tried  in  a delicate 
manner,  without  being  offensive  to  me,  to  give  the  impres- 
sion that  my  conviction  that  mankind  could  be  guided  by 
such  a naive  doctrine  as  that  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount 
proceeds  from  two  causes : that  such  a conviction  is  partly 
due  to  my  want  of  knowledge,  my  ignorance  of  history,  my 
ignorance  of  all  the  vain  attempts  to  apply  the  principles  of 
the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  to  life,  which  have  been  made  in 
history  and  have  led  to  nothing;  and  partly  it  is  due  to  my 
failing  to  appreciate  the  full  value  of  the  lofty  civilization 
to  which  mankind  has  attained  at  present,  with  its  Krupp 
cannons,  smokeless  powder,  colonization  of  Africa,  Irish 
Coercion  Bill,  parliamentary  government,  journalism,  strikes, 
and  the  Eiffel  Tower. 

So  wrote  de  Vogiie  and  Leroy  Beaulieu  and  Matthew 
Arnold ; so  wrote  the  American  author  Savage,  and  Inger- 
soll,  the  popular  freethinking  American  preacher,  and  many 
others. 

“Christ’s  teaching  is  no  use,  because  it  is  inconsistent 


46 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


with  our  industrial  age,”  says  Ingersoll  naively,  expressing 
in  this  utterance,  with  perfect  directness  and  simplicity,  the 
exact  notion  of  Christ’s  teaching  held  by  persons  of  refine- 
ment and  culture  of  our  times.  The  teaching  is  no  use  for 
our  industrial  age,  precisely  as  though  the  existence  of  this 
industrial  age  were  a sacred  fact  which  ought  not  to  and 
could  not  be  changed.  It  is  just  as  though  drunkards 
when  advised  how  they  could  be  brought  to  habits  of  so- 
briety should  answer  that  the  advice  is  incompatible  with 
their  habit  of  taking  alcohol. 

The  arguments  of  all  the  freethinking  critics,  Russian 
and  foreign  alike,  different  as  they  may  be  in  tone  and  man- 
ner of  presentation,  all  amount  essentially  to  the  same 
strange  misapprehension — namely,  that  Christ’s  teaching, 
one  of  the  consequences  of  which  is  non-resistance  to 
evil,  is  of  no  use  to  us  because  it  requires  a change  of  our 
life. 

Christ’s  teaching  is  useless  because,  if  it  were  carried 
into  practice,  life  could  not  go  on  as  at  present;  we  must 
add:  if  we  have  begun  by  living  sinfully,  as  we  do  live  and 
are  accustomed  to  live.  Not  only  is  the  question  of  non- 
resistance  to  evil  not  discussed ; the  very  mention  of  the 
fact  that  the  duty  of  non-resistance  enters  into  Christ’s 
teaching  is  regarded  as  satisfactory  proof  of  the  impractica- 
bility of  the  whole  teaching. 

Meanwhile  one  would  have  thought  it  was  necessary  to 
point  out  at  least  some  kind  of  solution  of  the  following 
question,  since  it  is  at  the  root  of  almost  everything  that 
interests  us. 

The  question  amounts  to  this:  In  what  way  are  we  to 
decide  men’s  disputes,  when  some  men  consider  evil  what 
others  consider  good,  and  vice  versa?  And  to  reply  that 
that  is  evil  which  I think  evil,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  my 
opponent  thinks  it  good,  is  not  a solution  of  the  difficulty. 
There  can  only  be  two  solutions:  either  to  find  a real 


IS  WITHIN  YOU  I'  47 

unquestionable  criterion  of  what  is  evil  or  not  to  resist  evil 
by  force. 

The  first  course  has  been  tried  ever  since  the  beginning 
of  historical  times,  and,  as  we  all  know,  it  has  not  hitherto 
led  to  any  successful  results. 

The  second  solution — not  forcibly  to  resist  what  we  con- 
sider evil  until  we  have  found  a universal  criterion — that  is 
the  solution  given  by  Christ. 

We  may  consider  the  answer  given  by  Christ  unsatis- 
factory ; we  may  replace  it  by  another  and  better,  by  find- 
ing a criterion  by  which  evil  could  be  defined  for  all  men 
unanimously  and  simultaneously;  we  may  simply,  like  sav- 
age nations,  not  recognize  the  existence  of  the  question. 
But  we  cannot  treat  the  question  as  the  learned  critics  of 
Christianity  do.  They  pretend  either  that  no  such  question 
exists  at  all  or  that  the  question  is  solved  by  granting  to 
certain  persons  or  assemblies  of  persons  the  right  to  define 
evil  and  to  resist  it  by  force.  But  w'e  know  all  the  while 
that  granting  such  a right  to  certain  persons  does  not  decide 
the  question  (still  less  so  w'hen  we  are  ourselves  the  certain 
persons),  since  there  are  always  people  who  do  not  recog- 
nize this  right  in  the  authorized  persons  or  assemblies. 

But  this  assumption,  that  what  seems  evil  to  us  is  really 
evil,  shows  a complete  misunderstanding  of  the  question, 
and  lies  at  the  root  of  the  argument  of  freethinking  critics 
about  the  Christian  religion.  In  this  way,  then,  the  discus- 
sions of  my  book  on  the  part  of  Churchmen  and  freethink- 
ing critics  alike  showed  me  that  the  majority  of  men  simply 
do  not  understand  either  Christ’s  teaching  or  the  questions 
which  Christ’s  teaching  solves. 


48 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


CHAPTER  III. 

CHRISTIANITY  MISUNDERSTOOD  BY  BELIEVERS. 

Meaning  of  Christian  Doctrine,  Understood  by  a Minority,  has  Become 
Completely  Incomprehensible  for  the  Majority  of  Men — Reason  of  this 
to  be  Found  in  Misinterpretation  of  Christianity  and  Mistaken  Con- 
viction of  Believers  and  Unbelievers  Alike  that  they  Understand  it — 
The  Meaning  of  Christianity  Obscured  for  Believers  by  the  Church — 
The  First  Appearance  of  Christ’s  Teaching — Its  Essence  and  Differ- 
ence from  Heathen  Religions — Christianity  not  Fully  Comprehended 
at  the  Beginning,  Became  More  and  More  Clear  to  those  who  Accepted 
it  from  its  Correspondence  with  Truth — Simultaneously  with  this 
Arose  the  Claim  to  Possession  of  the  Authentic  Meaning  of  the  Doc- 
trine Based  on  the  Miraculous  Nature  of  its  Transmission — Assembly 
of  Disciples  as  Described  in  the  Acts — The  Authoritative  Claim 
to  the  Sole  Possession  of  the  True  Meaning  of  Christ’s  Teaching 
Supported  by  Miraculous  Evidence  has  Led  by  Logical  Develop- 
ment to  the  Creeds  of  the  Churches — A Church  Could  Not  be  Founded 
by  Christ — Definitions  of  a Church  According  to  the  Catechisms — 
The  Churches  have  Always  been  Several  in  Number  and  Hostile  to 
One  Another — What  is  Heresy — The  Work  of  G.  Arnold  on  Heresies — 
Heresies  the  Manifestations  of  Progress  in  the  Churches — Churches 
Cause  Dissension  among  Men,  and  are  Always  Hostile  to  Christianity 
— Account  of  the  Work  Done  by  the  Russian  Church — Matt,  xxiii.  23 — 
The  Sermon  on  the  Mount  or  the  Creed — The  Orthodox  Church 
Conceals  from  the  People  the  True  Meaning  of  Christianity — The 
Same  Thing  is  Done  by  the  Other  Churches — All  the  External  Con- 
ditions of  Modern  Life  are  such  as  to  Destroy  the  Doctrine  of  the 
Church,  and  therefore  the  Churches  use  Every  Effort  to  Support  their 
Doctrines. 

Thus  the  information  I received,  after  my  book  came 
out,  went  to  show  that  the  Christian  doctrine,  in  its  direct 
and  simple  sense,  was  understood,  and  had  always  been 
understood,  by  a minority  of  men,  while  the  critics,  eccle- 
siastical and  freethinking  alike,  denied  the  possibility  of 
taking  Christ’s  teaching  in  its  direct  sense.  All  this  con- 
vinced me  that  while  on  one  hand  the  true  understanding 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


49 


of  this  doctrine  had  never  been  lost  to  a minority,  but  had 
been  established  more  and  more  clearly,  on  the  other  hand 
the  meaning  of  it  had  been  more  and  more  obscured  for 
the  majority.  So  that  at  last  such  a depth  of  obscurity  has 
been  reached  that  men  do  not  take  in  their  direct  sense 
even  the  simplest  precepts,  expressed  in  the  simplest  words, 
in  the  Gospel. 

Christ's  teaching  is  not  generally  understood  in  its  true, 
simple,  and  direct  sense  even  in  these  days,  when  the  light 
of  the  Gospel  has  penetrated  even  to  the  darkest  recesses 
of  human  consciousness  ; when,  in  the  words  of  Christ,  that 
which  was  spoken  in  the  ear  is  proclaimed  from  the  house- 
tops ; and  when  the  Gospel  is  influencing  every  side  of 
human  life — domestic,  economic,  civic,  legislative,  and 
international.  This  lack  of  true  understanding  of  Christ’s 
words  at  such  a time  would  be  inexplicable,  if  there  were 
not  causes  to  account  for  it. 

One  of  these  causes  is  iJhe  fact  that  believers  and 
unbelievers  alike  are  firmly  persuaded  that  they  have' 
understood  Christ’s  teaching  a long  time,  and  that  they 
understand  it  so  fully,  indubitably,  and  conclusively  that  it 
can  have  no  other  significance  than  the  one  they  attribute 
to  it.  And  the  reason  of  this  conviction  is  that  the  false 
interpretation  and  consequent  misapprehension  of  the 
Gospel  is  an  error  of  such  long  standing  Even  the 
strongest  current  of  water  cannot  add  a drop  to  a cup 
which  is  already  full. 

The  most  difficult  subjects  can  be  explained  to  the  most 
slow-witted  man  if  he  has  not  formed  any  idea  of  them 
already  ; but  the  simplest  thing  cannot  be  made  clear  to 
the  most  intelligent  man  if  he  is  firmly  persuaded  that  he 
knows  already,  without  a shadow  of  doubt,  what  is  laid 
before  him. 

The  Christian  doctrine  is  presented  to  the  men  of  our 
world  to-day  as  a doctrine  which  everyone  has  known  so 


5° 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


long  and  accepted  so  unhesitatingly  in  all  its  minutest 
details  that  it  cannot  be  understood  in  any  other  way  than 
it  is  understood  now.^J 

f ' Christianity  is  understood  now  by  all  who  profess  the 
doctrines  of  the  Church  as  a supernatural  miraculous 
revelation  of  everything  which  is  repeated  inxthe  CreecQ 
By  unbelievers  it  is  regarded  as  an  illustration  of  man’s 
craving  for  a belief  in  the  supernatural,  which  mankind  has 
now  outgrown,  as  an  historical  phenomenon  which  has 
received  full  expression  in  Catholicism,  Greek  Orthodoxy, 
and  Protestantism,  and  has  no  longer  any  living  signifi- 
cance for  us.  LThe  significance  of  the  Gospel  is  hidden 
from  believers  by  the  Church,  from  unbelievers  by  Science.^ 

I will  speak  first  of  the  former.  Eighteen  hundred  years'^ 
ago  there  appeared  in  the  midst  of  the  heathen  Roman 
world  a strange  new  doctrine,  unlike  any  of  the  old  reli- 
gions, and  attributed  to  a man,  Christ. 

This  new  doctrine  was  in  both  form  and  content  abso- 
lutely new  to  the  Jewish  world  in  which  it  originated,  and 
still  more  to  the  Roman  world  in  which  it  was  preached 
and  diffused. 

In  the  midst  of  the  elaborate  religious  observances  of 
Judaism,  in  which,  in  the  words  of  Isaiah,  law  was  laid 
upon  law,  and  in  the  midst  of  the  Roman  legal  system 
worked  out  to  the  highest  point  of  perfection,  a new  doc- 
trine appeared,  which  denied  not  only  every  deity,  and  all 
fear  and  worship  of  them,  but  even  all  human  institutions 
and  all  necessity  for  them.  |]]ln  place  of  all  the  rules  of  the 
old  religions,  this  doctrine  sets  up  only  a type  of  inward  per- 
i/  fection,  truth,  and  love  in  the  person  of  Christ,  and — as  a 
result  of  this  inward  perfection  being  attained  by  men — 
also  the  outward  perfection  foretold  by  the  Prophets — the 
kingdom  of  God,  when  all  men  will  cease  to  learn  to  make 
war,  when  all  shall  be  taught  of  God  and  united  in  love, 
and  the  lion  will  lie  down  with  the  lamb.  Instead  of  the 


75  WITHIN  YOU." 


51 


threats  of  punishment  which  all  the  old  laws  of  religions 
and  governments  alike  laid  down  for  non-fulfillment  of  their 
rules,  instead  of  promises  of  rewards  for  fulfillment  of 
them,  this  doctrine  called  men  to  it  only  because  it  was  the 
trutl^  John  vii.  17  : “If  any  man  will  do  His  will,  he  shall 
know  of  the  doctrine  whether  it  be  of  God.”  John  viii. 
46  : “ If  I say  the  truth,  why  do  ye  not  believe  me  ? But 
ye  seek  to  kill  me,  a man  that  hath  told  you  the  truth.  Ye 
shall  know  the  truth,  and  the  truth  shall  make  you  free. 
God  is  a spirit,  and  they  that  worship  him  must  worship 
him  in  spirit  and  in  truth.  niu  c;auin<r<;  and  vp 


know  of  my  sayings  whether 


this  doctrine  were  offered  except  its  truth,  the  correspond- 
ence of  the  doctrine  with  the  truth.  The  whole  teaching 
consisted  in  the  recognition  of  truth  and  following  it, 
in  a greater  and  greater  attainment  of  truth,  and  a closer 
and  closer  following  of  it  in  the  acts  of  life.  There  are 
no  acts  in  this  doctrine  which  could  justify  a man  and  make 
him  saved.  There  is  only  the  image  of  truth  to  guide'him, 
for  inward  perfection  in  the  person  of  Christ,  and  for  out- 
ward perfection  in  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  of 
God.  The  fulfillment  of  this  teaching  consists  only  in 
walking  in  the  chosen  way,  in  getting  nearer  to  inward  per- 
fection in  the  imitation  of  Christ,  and  outward  perfection 
in  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  greater 
or  less  blessedness  of  a man  depends,  according  to  this 
doctrine,  not  on  the  degree  of  perfection  to  which  he  has 
attained,  but  on  the  greater  or  less  swiftness  with  which  he 
is  pursuing^ 

The  progress  toward  perfection  of  the  publican 
Zaccheus,  of  the  woman  that  was  a sinner,  of  the 
robber  on  the  cross,  is  a greater  state  of  blessedness, 
according  to  this  doctrine,  than  the  stationary  righteous- 
ness of  the  Pharisee.  The  lost  sheep  is  dearer  than  ninety- 
nine  that  were  not  lost.  The  prodigal  son,  the  piece  of 


52 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


money  that  was  lost  and  found  again,  are  dearer,  more 
precious  to  God  than  those  which  have  not  been  lost. 

Every  condition,  according  to  this  doctrine,  is  only 
a particular  step  in  the  attainment  of  inward  and  outward 
perfection,  and  therefore  has  no  significance  of  itself. 
Blessedness  consists  in  progress  toward  perfection  ; to 
stand  still  in  any  condition  whatever  means  the  cessation 
of  this  blessedness. 

“Let  not  thy  left  hand  know  what  thy  right  hand 
doeth.”  “ No  man  having  put  his  hand  to  the  plow  and 
looking  back  is  fit  for  the  kingdom  of  God.”  “ Rejoice 
not  that  the  spirits  are  subject  to  you,  but  seek  rather 
that  your  names  be  written  in  heaven.”  “ Be  ye  perfect, 
even  as  your  Father  in  heaven  is  perfect.”  “ Seek  ye  first 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  and  its  righteousness.” 

The  fulfillment  of  this  precept  is  only  to  be  found  in 
uninterrupted  progress  toward  the  attainment  of  ever 
higher  truth,  toward  establishing  more  and  more  firmly 
an  ever  greater  love  within  oneself,  and  establishing  more 
and  more  widely  the  kingdom  of  God  outside  oneself. 

It  is  obvious  that,  appearing  as  it  did  in  the  midst  of 
the  Jewish  and  heathen  world,  such  teaching  could  not  be 
accepted  by  the  majority  of  men,  who  were  living  a life 
absolutely  different  from  what  was  required  by  it.  It  is 
obvious,  too,  that  even  for  those  by  whom  it  was  accepted, 
it  was  so  absolutely  opposed  to  all  their  old  views  that  it 
could  not  be  comprehensible  in  its  full  significance. 

It  has  been  only  by  a succession  of  misunderstandings, 
errors,  partial  explanations,  and  the  corrections  and 
additions  of  generations  that  the  meaning  of  the  Christian 
doctrine  has  grown  continuall}'  more  and  more  clear  to 
men.  The  Christian  view  of  life  has  exerted  an  influence 
on  the  Jewish  and  heathen,  and  the  heathen  and  Jewish 
view  of  life  has,  too,  exerted  an  influence  on  the  Christian. 
And  Christianity,  as  the  living  force,  has  gained  more  and 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


S3 


more  upon  the  extinct  Judaism  and  heathenism,  and  has 
grown  continually  clearer  and  clearer,  as  it  freed  itself 
from  the  admixture  of  falsehood  which  had  overlaid  it. 
Men  went  further  and  further  in  the  attainment  of  the 
meaning  of  Christianity,  and  realized  it  more  and  more 
in  life. 

The  longer  mankind  lived,  the  clearer  and  clearer 
became  the  meaning  of  Christianity,  as  must  always  be  the 
case  with  every  theory  of  life. 

Succeeding  generations  corrected  the  errors  of  their 
predecessors,  and  grew  ever  nearer  and  nearer  to  a com- 
prehension of  the  true  meaning.  It  was  thus  from  the 
very  earliest  times  of  Christianity.  And  so,  too,  from  the 
earliest  times  of  Christianity  there  were  men  who  began  to 
assert  on  their  own  authority  that  the  meaning  they  at- 
tribute to  the  doctrine  is  the  only  true  one,  and  as  proof 
bring  forward  supernatural  occurrences  in  support  of  the 
correctness  of  their  interpretation. 

This  was  the  principal  cause  at  first  of  the  misunder- 
standing of  the  doctrine,  and  afterward  of  the  complete 
distortion  of  it. 

was  supposed  that  Christ’s  teaching  was  transmitted 
to  men  not  like  every  other  truth,  but  in  a special  miracu- 
lous way.  Thus  the  truth  of  the  teaching  was  not  proved 
by  its  correspondence  with  the  needs  of  the  mind  and  the 
whole  nature  of  man,  but  by  the  miraculous  manner  of  its 
transmission,  which  was  advanced  as  an  irrefutable  proof 
of  the  truth  of  the  interpretation  put  on  it.  This  hypothesis 
originated  from  misunderstanding  of  the  teaching,  and  its 
result  was  to  make  it  impossible  to  understand  it  rightlya 

And  this  happened  first  in  the  earliest  times,  when  tne 
doctrine  was  still  not  so  fully  understood  and  often  inter- 
preted wrongly,  as  we  see  by  the  Gospels  and  the  Acts. 
The  less  the  doctrine  was  understood,  the  more  obscure  it 
appeared  and  the  more  necessary  were  external  proofs  of 


54 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


its  truth.  The  proposition  that  we  ought  not  to  do  unto 
others  as  we  would  not  they  should  do  unto  us,  did  not 
need  to  be  proved  by  miracles  and  needed  no  exercise  of 
faith,  because  this  proposition  is  in  itself  convincing  and  in 
harmony  with  man's  mind  and  nature  ; but  the  proposition 
that  Christ  was  God  had  to  be  proved  by  miracles  com- 
pletely  beyond  our  comprehension. 

'The  more  the  understanding  of  Christ’s  teaching  was 
obscured,  the  more  the  miraculous  was  introduced  into  it  ; 
and  the  more  the  miraculous  was  introduced  into  it,  the 
more  the  doctrine  was  strained  from  its  meaning  and  the 
more  obscure  it  became  ; and  the  more  it  was  strained 
from  its  meaning  and  the  more  obscure  it  became,  the  more 
strongly  its  infallibility  had  to  be  asserted,  and  the  less  com- 
prehensible the  doctrine  becam^ 

One  can  see  by  the  Gospels,  the  Acts,  and  the  Epistles 
how  from  the  earliest  times  the  non-comprehension  of  the 
doctrine  called  forth  the  need  for  proofs  through  the  miracu- 
lous and  incomprehensible. 

The  first  example  in  the  book  of  Acts  is  the  assembly 
which  gathered  together  in  Jerusalem  to  decide  the  ques- 
tion which  had  arisen,  whether  to  baptize  or  not  the  uncir- 
cumcised and  those  who  had  eaten  of  food  sacrificed  to 
idols. 

The  very  fact  of  this  question  being  raised  showed  that 
those  who  discussed  it  did  not  understand  the  teaching  of 
Christ,  who  rejected  ail  outward  observances — ablutions, 
purifications,  fasts,  and  sabbaths.  It  was  plainly  said. 

Not  that  which  goeth  into  a man’s  mouth,  but  that  which 
Cometh  out  of  a man’s  mouth,  defileth  him,”  and  therefore 
the  question  of  baptizing  the  uncircumcised  could  only 
have  arisen  among  men  who,  though  they  loved  their 
Master  and  dimly  felt  the  grandeur  of  his  teaching,  still 
did  not  understand  the  teaching  itself  very  clearly.  And 
this  was  the  fact. 


IS  IVITHIiV  YOU." 


55 


Just  in  proportion  to  the  failure  of  the  members  of  the 
assembly  to  understand  the  doctrine  was  their  need  of 
external  confirmation  of  their  incomplete  interpretation  of 
it.  And  then  to  settle  this  question,  the  very  asking  of 
which  proved  their  misunderstanding  of  the  doctrine,  there 
was  uttered  in  this  assembly,  as  is  described  in  the  Acts, 
that  strange  phrase,  which  was  for  the  first  time  found 
necessary  to  give  external  confirmation  to  certain  asser- 
tions, and  which  has  been  productive  of  so  much  evil. 

That  is,  it  was  asserted  that  the  correctness  of  what 
they  had  decided  was  guaranteed  by  the  miraculous  partici- 
pation of  the  Holy  Gho.st,  that  is,  of  God,  in  their  decision. 
But  the  assertion  that  the  Holy  Ghost,  that  is,  God,  spoke 
through  the  Apostles,  in  its  turn  wanted  proof.  And  thus 
it  was  necessary,  to  confirm  this,  that  the  Holy  Ghost 
should  descend  at  Pentecost  in  tongues  of  fire  upon  those 
who  made  this  assertion.  (In  the  account  of  it,  the  de- 
scent of  the  Holy  Ghost  precedes  the  assembly,  but  the 
book  of  Acts  was  written  much  later  than  both  events.) 
But  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost  too  had  to  be  proved 
for  those  who  had  not  seen  the  tongues  of  fire  (though  it  is 
not  easy  to  understand  why  a tongue  of  fire  burning  above 
a man’s  head  should  prove  that  what  that  man  is  going  to 
say  will  be  infallibly  the  truth).  And  so  arose  the  neces- 
sity for  still  more  miracles  and  changes,  raisings  of  the 
dead  to  life,  and  strikings  of  the  living  dead,  and  all  those 
marvels  which  have  been  a stumbling-block  to  men,  of 
which  the  Acts  is  full,  and  which,  far  from  ever  convincing 
one  of  the  truth  of  the  Christian  doctrine,  can  only  repel 
men  from  it.  The  result  of  such  a means  of  confirming 
the  truth  was  that  the  more  these  confirmations  of  truth 
by  tales  of  miracles  were  heaped  up  one  after  another,  the 
more  the  doctrine  was  distorted  from  its  original  meaning, 
and  the  more  incomprehensible  it  became. 

Thus  it  was  from  the  earliest  times,  and  so  it  went  on, 


56 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


constantly  increasing,  till  it  reached  in  our  day  the  logical 
climax  of  the  dogmas  of  transubstantiatioii  and  the  in- 
fallibility of  the  Pope,  or  of  the  bishops,  or  of  Scripture, 
and  of  requiring  a blind  faith  rendered  incomprehensible 
and  utterly  meaningless,  not  in  God,  but  in  Christ,  not  in 
a doctrine,  but  in  a person,  as  in  Catholicism,  or  in  persons, 
as  in  Greek  Orthodoxy,  or  in  a book,  as  in  Protestantism. 
The  more  widely  Christianity  was  diffused,  and  the  greater 
the  number  of  people  unprepared  for  it  who  were  brought 
under  its  sway,  the  less  it  was  understood,  the  more  abso- 
lutely was  its  infallibility  insisted  on,  and  the  less  possible 
it  became  to  understand  the  true  meaning  of  the  doctrine. 
In  the  times  of  Constantine  the  whole  interpretation  of  the 
doctrine  had  been  already  reduced  to  a rhum^ — sup- 
ported by  the  temporal  authority — of  the  disputes  that  had 
taken  place  in  the  Council — to  a creed  which  reckoned  off 
— I believe  in  so  and  so,  and  so  and  so,  and  so  and  so  to 
the  end — to  one  holy.  Apostolic  Church,  which  means  the 
infallibility  of  those  persons  who  call  themselves  the 
Church.  So  that  it  all  amounts  to  a man  no  longer  believ- 
ing in  God  nor  Christ,  as  they  are  revealed  to  him,  but 
believing  in  what  the  Church  orders  him  to  believe  in. 

But  the  Church  is  holy  ; the  Church  was  founded  by 
Christ.  God  could  not  leave  men  to  interpret  his  teaching 
at  random — therefore  he  founded  the  Church.  All  those 
statements  are  so  utterly  untrue  and  unfounded  that  one  is 
ashamed  to  refute  them.  Nowhere  nor  in  anything,  except 
in  the  assertion  of  the  Church,  can  we  find  that  God  or 
Christ  founded  anything  like  what  Churchmen  understand 
by  the  Church.  In  the  Gospels  there  is  a warning  against 
the  Church,  as  it  is  an  external  authority,  a warning  most 
clear  and  obvious  in  the  passage  where  it  is  said  that 
Christ’s  followers  should  “ call  no  man  master.”  But 
nowhere  is  anything  said  of  the  foundation  of  what 
Churchmen  call  the  Church. 


IS  WITHIN  your 


57 


The  word  church  is  used  twice  in  the  Gospels — once  in 
the  sense  of  an  assembly  of  men  to  decide  a dispute,  the 
other  time  in  connection  with  the  obscure  utterance  about 
a stone — Peter,  and  the  gates  of  hell.  From  these  two 
passages  in  which  the  word  church  is  used,  in  the  significa- 
tion merely  of  an  assembly,  has  been  deduced  all  that  we 
now  understand  by  the  Church. 

[^t  Christ  could  not  have  founded  the  Church,  that  is, 
what  we  now  understand  by  that  word.  For  nothing  like 
the  idea  of  the  Church  as  we  know  it  now,  with  its  sacra- 
ments, miracles,  and  above  all  its  claim  to  infallibility,  is  to 
be  found  either  in  Christ’s  words  or  in  the  ideas  of  the  men 
of  that  time.^ 

The  factFnat  men  called  what  was  formed  afterward  by 
the  same  word  as  Christ  used  for  something  totally  different, 
does  not  give  them  the  right  to  assert  that  Christ  founded 
the  one,  true  Church. 

Besides,  if  Christ  had  really  founded  such  an  institution 
as  the  Church  for  the  foundation  of  all  his  teaching  and  the 
whole  faith,  he  would  certainly  have  described  this  institu- 
tion clearly  and  definitely,  and  would  have  given  the  only 
true  Church,  besides  tales  of  miracles,  which  are  used  to 
support  every  kind  of  superstition,  some  tokens  so  unmis- 
takable that  no  doubt  of  its  genuineness  could  ever  have 
arisen.  But  nothing  of  the  sort  was  done  by  him.  And 
there  have  been  and  still  are  different  institutions,  each 
calling  itself  the  true  Church. 

The  Catholic  catechism  says:  “L’Eglise  est  la  soci^td 
des  fideles  dtablie  par  notre  Seigneur  Jesus  Christ,  repandue 
sur  toute  la  terre  et  soumise  a I’authoritd  des  pasteurs  legi- 
times, principalement  notre  Saint  Pere  le  Pape,”  * under- 
standing by  the  words  “ pasteurs  legitimes  ” an  association 

* “ The  Church  is  the  society  of  the  faithful,  established  by  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  spread  over  the  whole  earth,  and  subject  to  the  authority 
of  its  lawful  pastors,  and  chief  of  them  our  Holy  Father  the  Pope.” 


58 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


of  men  having  the  Pope  at  its  head,  and  consisting  of  certain 
individuals  bound  together  by  a certain  organization. 

The  Greek  Orthodox  catechism  says  : “ The  Church  is 
a society  founded  upon  earth  by  Jesus  Christ,  which  is 
united  into  one  whole,  by  one  divine  doctrine  and  by  sacra- 
ments, under  the  rule  and  guidance  of  a priesthood  appointed 
by  God,”  meaning  by  the  “ priesthood  appointed  by  God  ” 
the  Greek  Orthodox  priesthood,  consisting  of  certain  indi- 
viduals who  happen  to  be  in  such  or  such  positions. 

The  Lutheran  catechism  says  : “ The  Church  is  holy 
Christianity,  or  the  collection  of  all  believers  under  Christ, 
their  head,  to  whom  the  Holy  Ghost  through  the  Gospels 
and  sacraments  promises,  communicates,  and  administers 
heavenly  salvation,”  meaning  that  the  Catholic  Church  is 
lost  in  error,  and  that  the  true  means  of  salvation  is  in 
Lutheranism. 

For  Catholics  the  Church  of  God  coincides  with  the 
Roman  priesthood  and  the  Pope.  For  the  Greek  Orthodox 
believer  the  Church  of  God  coincides  with  the  establishment 
and  priesthood  of  Russia.* 

For  Lutherans  the  Church  of  God  coincides  with  a body 
of  men  who  recognize  the  authority  of  the  Bible  and 
Luther’s  catechism. 

Ordinarily,  when  speaking  of  the  rise  of  Christianity, 

* Homyakov’s  definition  of  the  Church,  which  was  received  with  some 
favor  among  Russians,  does  not  improve  matters,  if  we  are  to  agree  with 
Homyakov  in  considering  the  Greek  Orthodo.x  Church  as  the  one  true 
Church.  Homyakov  asserts  that  a church  is  a collection  of  men  (all 
without  distinction  of  clergy  and  laymen)  united  together  by  love,  and 
that  only  to  men  united  by  love  is  the  truth  revealed  (let  us  love  each 
other,  that  in  the  unity  of  thought,  etc.),  and  that  such  a church  is  the 
church  which,  in  the  first  place,  recognizes  the  Nicene  Creed,  and  in 
the  second  place  does  not,  after  the  division  of  the  churches,  recognize 
the  popes  and  new  dogmas.  But  with  such  a definition  of  the  church, 
there  is  still  more  difficulty  in  reconciling,  as  Homyakov  tries  to  do,  the 
church  united  by  love  with  the  church  that  recognizes  the  Nicene  Creed 


IS  WITHIN  you: 


59 


men  belonging  to  one  of  the  existing  churches  use  the 
word  church  in  the  singular,  as  though  there  were  and  had 
been  only  one  church.  But  this  is  absolutely  incorrect. 
The  Church,  as  an  institution  which  asserted  that  it  pos- 
sessed infallible  truth,  did  not  make  its  appearance  singly  ; 
there  were  at  least  two  churches  directly  this  claim  was 
made. 

While  believers  were  agreed  among  themselves  and  the 
body  was  one,  it  had  no  need  to  declare  itself  as  a church. 
It  was  only  when  believers  were  split  up  into  opposing 
parties,  renouncing  one  another,  that  it  seemed  necessary 
to  each  party  to  confirm  their  own  truth  by  ascribing  to 
themselves  infallibility.  The  conception  of  one  church 
only  arose  when  there  were  two  sides  divided  and  disputing, 
who  each  called  the  other  side  heres}’-,  and  recognized  their 
own  side  only  as  the  infallible  church. 

If  we  knew  that  there  was  a church  which  decided  in  the 
year  51  to  receive  the  uncircumcised,  it  is  only  so  because 
there  was  another  church — of  the  Judaists — who  decided 
to  keep  the  uncircumcised  out. 

If  there  is  a Catholic  Church  now  which  asserts  its  own 
infallibility,  that  is  only  because  there  are  churches — 
Greco-Russian,  Old  Orthodox,  and  Lutheran — each  assert- 
ing its  own  infallibility  and  denying  that  of  all  other 
churches.  So  that  the  one  Church  is  only  a fantastic 

and  the  doctrine  of  Photius.  So  that  Homyakov’s  assertion  that  this 
church,  united  by  love,  and  consequently  holy,  is  the  same  church  as 
the  Greek  Orthodox  priesthood  profess  faith  in,  is  even  more  arbitrary 
than  the  assertions  of  the  Catholics  or  the  Orthodox.  If  we  admit  the 
idea  of  a church  in  the  sense  Homyakov  gives  to  it — that  is,  a body  of 
men  bound  together  by  love  and  truth — then  all  that  any  man  can  predi- 
cate in  regard  to  this  body,  if  such  an  one  exists,  is  its  love  and  truth, 
but  there  can  be  no  outer  signs  by  which  one  could  reckon  oneself  or 
another  as  a member  of  this  holy  body,  nor  by  which  one  could  put  any- 
one outside  it ; so  that  no  institution  having  an  e.xternal  existence  can 
correspond  to  this  idea. 


6o 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


imagination  which  has  not  the  least  trace  of  reality  about 
it. 

As  a real  historical  fact  there  has  existed,  and  still  exist, 
several  bodies  of  men,  each  asserting  that  it  is  the  one 
Church,  founded  by  Christ,  and  that  all  the  others  who  call 
themselves  churches  are  only  sects  and  heresies. 

The  catechisms  of  the  churches  of  the  most  world-wide 
influence — the  Catholic,  the  Old  Orthodox,  and  the 
Lutheran — openly  assert  this. 

In  the  Catholic  catechism  it  is  said  : “ Quels  sont  ceux 
qui  sont  hors  de  reglise  ? Les  infideles,  les  heretiques,  les 
schismatiques.”  * The  so-called  Greek  Orthodox  are 
regarded  as  schismatics,  the  Lutherans  as  heretics ; so 
that  according  to  the  Catholic  catechism  the  only  people  in 
the  Church  are  Catholics. 

In  the  so-called  Orthodox  catechism  it  is  said  : By  the 
one  Christian  Church  is  understood  the  Orthodox,  which 
remains  fully  in  accord  with  the  Universal  Church.  As 
for  the  Roman  Church  and  other  sects  (the  Lutherans  and 
the  rest  they  do  not  even  dignify  by  the  name  of  church), 
they  cannot  be  included  in  the  one  true  Church,  since  they 
have  themselves  separated  from  it. 

According  to  this  definition  the  Catholics  and  Lutherans 
are  outside  the  Church,  and  there  are  only  Orthodox  in  the 
Church. 

The  Lutheran  catechism  says  : “ Die  wahre  Kirche  wild 
darein  erkannt,  dass  in  ihr  das  Wort  Gottes  lauter  und  rein 
ohne  Menschenzusatze  gelehrt  und  die  Sacramente  treu 
nach  Christ!  Einsetzung  gewahret  werden.”  f 

According  to  this  definition  all  those  who  have  added 

* “ Who  are  those  who  are  outside  the  Church  ? Infidels,  heretics,  and 
schismatics.” 

f “ The  true  Church  will  be  known  by  the  Word  of  God  being  studied 
clear  and  unmixed  with  man’s  additions  and  the  sacraments  being  main- 
tained faithful  to  Christ’s  teaching.” 


/S  WITHIN  YOU." 


6i 

anything  to  the  teaching  of  Christ  and  the  apostles,  as  the 
Catholic  and  Greek  churches  have  done,  are  outside  the 
Church.  x\nd  in  the  Church  there  are  only  Protestants. 

The  Catholics  assert  that  the  Holy  Ghost  has  been  trans- 
mitted without  a break  in  their  priesthood.  The  Orthodox 
assert  that  the  same  Holy  Ghost  has  been  transmitted 
without  a break  in  their  priesthood.  The  Arians  asserted 
that  the  Holy  Ghost  was  transmitted  in  their  priesthood 
(they  asserted  this  with  just  as  much  right  as  the  churches 
in  authority  now).  The  Protestants  of  every  kind — 
Lutherans,  Reformed  Church,  Presbyterians,  Methodists, 
Swedenborgians,  Mormons — assert  that  the  Holy  Ghost  is 
only  present  in  their  communities.  If  the  Catholics  assert 
that  the  Holy  Ghost,  at  the  time  of  the  division  of  the 
Church  into  Arian  and  Greek,  left  the  Church  that  fell 
away  and  remained  in  the  one  true  Church,  with  precisely 
the  same  right  the  Protestants  of  every  denomination  can 
assert  that  at  the  time  of  the  separation  of  their  Church 
from  the  Catholic  the  Holy  Ghost  left  the  Catholic  and 
passed  into  the  Church  they  professed.  And  this  is  just 
what  they  do. 

Every  church  traces  its  creed  through  an  uninterrupted 
transmission  from  Christ  and  the  Apostles.  And  truly 
every  Christian  creed  that  has  been  derived  from  Christ 
must  have  come  down  to  the  present  generation  through  a 
certain  transmission.  But  that  does  not  prove  that  it  alone 
of  all  that  has  been  transmitted,  excluding  all  the  rest,  can 
be  the  sole  truth,  admitting  of  no  doubt. 

Every  branch  in  a tree  comes  from  the  root  in  unbroken 
connection  ; but  the  fact  that  each  branch  conies  from  the 
one  root,  does  not  prove  at  all  that  each  branch  was  the 
only  one.  It  is  precisely  the  same  with  the  Church.  Every 
church  presents  exactly  the  same  proofs  of  the  succession, 
and  even  the  same  miracles,  in  support  of  its  authenticity, 
as  every  other  So  that  there  is  but  one  strict  and  exact 


62 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


definition  of  what  is  a church  (not  of  something  fantastic 
which  we  would  wish  it  to  be,  but  of  what  it  is  and  has 
been  in  reality) — a church  is  a body  of  men  who  claim  for 
themselves  that  they  are  in  complete  and  sole  possession 
of  the  truth.  TAnd  these  bodies,  having  in  course  of  time, 
aided  by  the  support  of  the  temporal  authorities,  developed 
into  powerful  institutions,  have  been  the  principal  obstacles 
to  the  diffusion  of  a true  comprehension  of  the  teaching  of 
Christ. 

It  could  not  be  otherwise.  The  chief  peculiarity  which 
distinguished  Christ’s  teaching  from  previous  religions 
consisted  in  the  fact  that  those  who  accepted  it  strove 
ever  more  and  more  to  comprehend  and  realize  its  teach- 
ing. But  the  Church  doctrine  asserted  its  own  complete 
and  final  comprehension  and  realization  of  it. 

Strange  though  it  may  seem  to  us  who  have  been 
brought  up  in  the  erroneous  view  of  the  Church  as  a 
Christian  institution,  and  in  contempt  for  heresy,  yet  the 
fact  is  that  only  in  what  was  called  heresy  was  there  any 
true  movement,  that  is,  true  Christianity,  and  that  it  only- 
ceased  to  be  so  when  those  heresies  stopped  short  in  their 
movement  and  also  petrified  into  the  fixed  forms  of  a 
church. 

And,  indeed,  what  is  a heresy  ? Read  all  the  theologi- 
cal works  one  after  another.  In  all  of  them  heresy  is  the 
subject  which  first  presents  itself  for  definition  ; since 
every  theological  work  deals  with  the  true  doctrine  of 
Christ  as  distinguished  from  the  erroneous  doctrines 
which  surround  it,  that  is,  heresies.  Yet  you  will  not  find 
anywhere  anything  like  a definition  of  heresy. 

The  treatment  of  this  subject  by  the  learned  historian  of 
Christianity,  E.  tie  Pressense,  in  his  “ Histoire  du  Dogme” 
(Paris,  1869),  under  the  heading  “ Ubi  Christus,  ibi 
Ecclesia,”  may  serve  as  an  illustration  of  the  complete 
absence  of  anything  like  a definition  of  what  is  understood 


IS  WITHIN  YOU: 


^3 


by  the  word  heresy.  Here  is  what  he  says  in  his  intro- 
duction (p.  3)  : “ Je  sais  que  Ton  nous  conteste  le  droit  de 
qualifier  ainsi  [that  is,  to  call  heresies]  les  tendances  qui 
furent  si  vivement  combattues  par  les  premiers  Pferes.  La 
designation  meme  d’heresie  semble  une  atteinte  portee  a la 
liberte  de  conscience  et  de  pensee.  Nous  ne  pouvons 
partager  ce  scrupule,  car  il  n’irait  k rien  moins  qu’^  enlever 
au  Christianisme  tout  caractere  distinctif.”  * 

And  though  he  tells  us  that  after  Constantine’s  time  the 
Church  did  actually  abuse  its  power  by  designating  those 
who  dissented  from  it  as  heretics  and  persecuting  them, 
yet  he  says,  when  speaking  of  early  times:  “ L’eglise  est 
une  Fibre  association  r il  y a tout  profit  k se  sdparer  d’elle. 
La  pol^mique  contre  I’erreur  n’a  d’autres  ressources  que  la 
pensee  et  le  sentiment.  Un  type  doctrinal  uniforme  n’a 
pas  encore  6te  ^labord  ; les  divergences  secondaires  se  pro- 
duisent  en  Orient  et  en  Occident  avec  une  entiere  liberty  ; 
la  theologie  n’est  point  liee  a d’invariables  formules.  Si  au 
sein  de  cette  diversite  apparait  un  fonds  commun  de  croy- 
ances,  n’est-on  pas  en  droit  d’y  voir  non  pas  un  syst^me 
formule  et  compost  par  les  representants  d’une  autorit^ 
d’ecole,  mais  la  foi  elle-meme  dans  son  instinct  le  plus  s(tr 
et  sa  manifestation  la  plus  spontanee  ? Si  cette  meme  una- 
nimite  qui  se  revele  dans  les  croyances  essentielles,  se 
retrouve  pour  repousser  telles  ou  telles  tendances,  ne 
serons-nous  pas  en  droit  de  conclure  que  ces  tendances 
^talent  en  desacord  flagrant  avec  les  principes  fondamentaux 
dn  christianisme  ? Cette  pr^somption  ne  se  transformera- 
t-elle  pas  en  certitude  si  nous  reconnai.ssons  dans  la  doctrine 
universellement  repouss^e  par  I’Eglise  les  traits  caract^ris- 

* “ I know  that  our  right  to  qualify  thus  the  tendencies  which  were  so 
actively  opposed  by  the  early  Fathers  is  contested.  The  very  use  of  the 
word  heresy  seems  an  attack  upon  liberty  of  conscience  and  thought. 
We  cannot  share  this  scruple  ; for  it  would  amount  to  nothing  less  than 
depriving  Christianity  of  all  distinctive  character.” 


64 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


tiques  de  Tune  des  religions  du  passe  ? Pour  dire  que  le 
gnosticisme  ou  I’ebionitisme  sont  les  formes  legitimes  de  la 
pensee  chretienne  il  faut  dire  hardiment  qu’il  n’y  a pas  de 
pensee  chretienne,  ni  de  caractere  specifique  qui  la  fasse 
reconnaitre.  Sous  pretexte  de  I’dlargir,  on  la  dissout. 
Personne  au  temps  de  Platon  n’eGt  ose  couvrir  de  son  nom 
une  doctrine  qui  n’eut  pas  fait  place  a la  theorie  des  iddes ; 
et  Ton  eht  excite  les  justes  moqueries  de  la  Grece,  en 
voulant  faire  d’Epicure  ou  de  Zenon  un  disciple  de  I’Acade* 
mie.  Reconnaissons  done  que  s’il  existe  une  religion  ou 
une  doctrine  qui  s’appelle  christianisme,  elle  peut  avoir  ses 
heresies.”  * 

The  author’s  whole  argument  amounts  to  this  ; that 
every  opinion  which  differs  from  the  code  of  dogmas  we 

* “ The  Church  is  a free  association  ; there  is  much  to  be  gained  by 
separation  from  it.  Conflict  with  error  has  no  weapons  other  than 
thought  and  feeling.  One  uniform  type  of  doctrine  has  not  yet  been 
elaborated ; divergencies  in  secondary  matters  arise  freely  in  East  and 
West ; theology  is  not  wedded  to  invariable  formulas.  If  in  the  midst 
of  this  diversity  a mass  of  beliefs  common  to  all  is  apparent,  is  one  not 
justified  in  seeing  in  it,  not  a formulated  system,  framed  by  the  repre- 
sentatives of  pedantic  authority,  but  faith  itself  in  its  surest  instinct  and 
its  most  spontaneous  manifestation  ? If  the  same  unanimity  which  is 
revealed  in  essential  points  of  belief  is  found  also  in  rejecting  certain 
tendencies,  are  we  not  justified  in  concluding  that  these  tendencies  were 
in  flagrant  opposition  to  the  fundamental  principles  of  Christianity  ? And 
will  not  this  presumption  be  transformed  into  certainty  if  we  recognize  in 
the  doctrine  universally  rejected  by  the  Church  the  characteristic  features 
of  one  of  the  religions  of  the  past  ? To  say  that  gnosticism  or  ebionitism 
are  legitimate  forms  of  Christian  thought,  one  must  boldly  deny  the 
existence  of  Christian  thought  at  all,  or  any  specific  character  by  which 
it  could  be  recognized.  While  ostensibly  widening  its  realm,  one  un- 
dermines it.  No  one  in  the  time  of  Plato  would  have  ventured  to  give  his 
name  to  a doctrine  in  which  the  theory  of  ideas  had  no  place,  and  one 
would  deservedly  have  excited  the  ridicule  of  Greece  by  trying  to  pass 
off  Epicurus  or  Zeno  as  a disciple  of  the  Academy.  Let  us  recognize, 
then,  that  if  a religion  or  a doctrine  exists  which  is  called  Christianity, 
it  may  have  its  heresies.” 


75  WITHIN-  YOU." 


65 


believe  in  at  a given  time,  is  heresy.  But  of  course  at  any 
given  time  and  place  men  always  believe  in  something  or 
other  ; and  this  belief  in  something,  indefinite  at  any  place, 
at  some  time,  cannot  be  a criterion  of  truth. 

It  all  amounts  to  this  : since  ubi  Christus  ibi  Ecclesia, 
then  Christus  is  where  we  are. 

Every  so-called  heresy,  regarding,  as  it  does,  its  own 
creed  as  the  truth,  can  just  as  easily  find  in  Church  history 
a series  of  illustrations  of  its  own  creed,  can  use  all  Pres- 
sense’s  arguments  on  its  own  behalf,  and  can  call  its  own 
creed  the  one  truly  Christian  creed.  And  that  is  just  what 
all  heresies  do  and  have  always  done. 

The  only  definition  of  heresy  (the  word  aipeffi?,  means 
a part)  is  .this  : the  name  given  by  a body  of  men  to  any 
opinion  which  rejects  a part  of  the  Creed  professed  by  that 
body.  The  more  frequent  meaning,  more  often  ascribed 
to  the  word  heresy,  is — that  of  an  opinion  which  rejects  the 
Church  doctrine  founded  and  supported  by  the  temporal 
authorities. 

There  is  a remarkable  and  voluminous  work,  very  little 
known,  “ Unpartheyische  Kirchen- und  Ketzer-Historie,” 
1729,  by  Gottfried  Arnold,  which  deals  with  precisely  this 
subject,  and  points  out  all  the  unlawfulness,  the  arbitrari- 
ness, the  senselessness,  and  the  cruelty  of  using  the  word 
heretic  in  the  sense  of  reprobate.  This  book  is  an  attempt 
to  write  the  history  of  Christianity  in  the  form  of  a history 
of  heresy. 

In  the  introduction  the  author  propounds  a series  of 
questions  : (i)  Of  those  who  make  heretics  ; (2)  Of  those 
whom  they  made  heretics  ; (3)  Of  heretical  subjects  them- 
selves ; (4)  Of  the  method  of  making  heretics  ; and  (5)  Of 
the  object  and  result  of  making  heretics. 

On  each  of  these  points  he  propounds  ten  more  ques- 
tions, the  answers  to  which  he  gives  later  on  from  the 
works  of  well-known  theologians.  But  he  leaves  the  reader 


66 


" THE  KINGDOM  OF  COD 


to  draw  for  himself  the  principal  conclusion  from  the 
expositions  in  the  whole  book.  As  examples  of  these 
questions,  in  which  the  answers  are  to  some  extent  included 
also,  I will  quote  the  following.  Under  the  4th  head,  of 
the  manner  in  which  heretics  are  made,  he  says,  in  one  of 
the  questions  (in  the  7th)  : 

“ Does  not  all  history  show  that  the  greatest  makers  of 
heretics  and  masters  of  that  craft  were  just  these  wise  men, 
from  whom  the  Father  hid  his  secrets,  that  is,  the  hypo- 
crites, the  Pharisees,  and  lawyers,  men  utterly  godless  and 
perverted  (Question  20-21)?  And  in  the  corrupt  times  of 
Christianity  were  not  these  very  men  cast  out,  denounced 
by  the  hypocrites  and  envious,  who  were  endowed  by  God 
with  great  gifts  and  who  would  in  the  days  of  pure  Christi- 
anity  have  been  held  in  high  honor  ? And,  on  the  other 
hand,  would  not  the  men  who,  in  the  decline  of  Christianity 
raised  themselves  above  all,  and  regarded  themselves  as  the 
teachers  of  the  purest  Christianity,  would  not  these  very 
men,  in  the  times  of  the  apostles  and  disciples  of  Christ, 
have  been  regarded  as  the  most  shameless  heretics  and 
anti-Christians  ? ” 

He  expounds,  among  other  things  in  these  questions,  the 
theory  that  any  verbal  expression  of  faith,  such  as  was 
demanded  by  the  Church,  and  the  departure  from  which 
was  reckoned  as  heresy,  could  never  fully  cover  the  exact 
religious  ideas  of  a believer,  and  that  therefore  the  demand 
for  an  expression  of  faith  in  certain  words  was  ever  pro- 
ductive of  heresy,  and  he  says,  in  Question  21  : 

“ And  if  heavenly  things  and  thoughts  present  themselves 
to  a man’s  mind  as  so  great  and  so  profound  that  he  does 
not  find  corresponding  words  to  express  them,  ought  one  to 
call  him  a heretic,  because  he  cannot  express  his  idea  with 
perfect  exactness  ? ” And  in  Question  33  : 

“And  is  not  the  fact  that  there  was  no  heresy  in  the 
earliest  days  due  to  the  fact  that  the  Christians  did  not 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


67 


judge  one  another  by  verbal  expressions,  but  by  deed  and 
by  heart,  since  they  had  perfect  liberty  to  express  their 
ideas  without  the  dread  of  being  called  heretics  ; was  it 
not  the  easiest  and  most  ordinary  ecclesiastical  proceeding, 
if  the  clergy  wanted  to  get  rid  of  or  to  ruin  anyone,  for 
them  to  cast  suspicion  on  the  person’s  belief,  and  to  throw 
a cloak  of  heresy  upon  him,  and  by  this  means  to  procure 
his  condemnation  and  removal  ? 

“True  though  it  may  be  that  there  were  sins  and  errors 
among  the  so-called  heretics,  it  is  no  less  true  and  evident,’’ 
he  says  farther  on,  “ from  the  innumerable  examples  quoted 
here  (/.  e.,  in  the  history  of  the  Church  and  of  heresy),  that 
there  was  not  a single  sincere  and  conscientious  man  of  any 
importance  whom  the  Churchmen  would  not  from  envy  or 
other  causes  have  ruined.’’ 

Thus,  almost  two  hundred  years  ago,  the  real  meaning 
of  heresy  was  understood.  And  notwithstanding  that,  the 
same  conception  of  it  has  gone  on  existing  up  to  now. 
And  it  cannot  fail  to  exist  so  long  as  the  conception  of  a 
church  exists.  Heresy  is  the  obverse  side  of  the  Church. 
Wherever  there  is  a church,  there  must  be  the  conception 
of  heresy.  A church  is  a body  of  men  who  assert  that 
they  are  in  possession  of  infallible  truth.  Heresy  is  the 
opinion  of  the  men  who  do  not  admit  the  infallibility  of 
the  Church’s  truth. 

Heresy  makes  its  appearance  in  the  Church.  It  is  the 
effort  to  break  through  the  petrified  authority  of  the 
Church.  All  effort  after  a living  comprehension  of  the 
doctrine  has  been  made  by  heretics.  'I’ertullian,  Origen, 
Augustine,  Luther,  Huss,  Savonarola,  Helchitsky,  and  the 
rest  were  heretics.  It  could  not  be  otherwise. 

The  follower  of  Christ,  whose  service  means  an  ever- 
growing understanding  of  his  teaching,  and  an  ever-closer 
fulfillment  of  it,  in  progress  toward  perfection,  cannot,  just 
because  he  is  a follower  of  Christ,  claim  for  himself  or  any 


68 


” THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


other  that  he  understands  Christ’s  teaching  fully  and  fulfills 
it.  Still  less  can  he  claim  this  for  any  body  of  men. 

To  whatever  degree  of  understanding  and  perfection  the 
follower  of  Christ  may  have  attained,  he  always  feels  the 
insufficiency  of  his  understanding  and  fulfillment  of  it, 
and  is  always  striving  toward  a fuller  understanding  and 
fulfillment.  And  therefore,  to  assert  of  one’s  self  or  of  any 
body  of  men,  that  one  is  or  they  are  in  possession  of  per- 
fect understanding  and  fulfillment  of  Christ’s  word,  is  to 
renounce  the  very  spirit  of  Christ’s  teaching. 

Strange  as  it  may  seem,  the  churches  as  churches  have 
always  been,  and  cannot  but  be,  institutions  not  only  alien 
in  spirit  to  Christ’s  teaching,  but  even  directly  antagonistic 
to  it.  With  good  reason  Voltaire  calls  the  Church  Vinfanie; 
with  good  reason  have  all  or  almost  all  so-called  sects  of 
Christians  recognized  the  Church  as  the  scarlet  woman 
foretold  in  the  Apocalypse  ; with  good  reason  is  the  his- 
tory of  the  Church  the  history  of  the  greatest  cruelties  and 
horrors. 

The  churches  as  churches  are  not,  as  many  people  sup- 
pose, institutions  which  have  Christian  principles  for  their 
basis,  even  though  they  may  have  strayed  a little  away 
from  the  straight  path.  The  churches  as  churches,  as 
bodies  which  assert  their  own  infallibility,  are  institutions 
opposed  to  Christianity.  There  is  not  only  nothing  in 
common  between  the  churches  as  such  and  Christianity, 
except  the  name,  but  they  represent  two  principles  funda- 
mentally opposed  and  antagonistic  to  one  another.  One 
represents  pride,  violence,  self-assertion,  stagnation,  and 
death  ; the  other,  meekness,  penitence,  humility,  progress, 
and  life. 

We  cannot  serve  these  two  masters  ; we  have  to  choose 
between  them. 

The  servants  of  the  churches  of  all  denominations, 
especially  of  later  times,  try  to  show  themselves  champions 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


69 


of  progress  in  Christianity.  They  make  concessions,  wish 
to  correct  the  abuses  that  have  slipped  into  the  Church, 
and  maintain  that  one  cannot,  on  account  of  these  abuses, 
deny  the  principle  itself  of  a Christian  church,  which  alone 
can  bind  all  men  together  in  unity  and  be  a mediator 
between  men  and  God.  But  this  is  all  a mistake.  Not 
only  have  the  churches  never  bound  men  together  in  unity  ; 
they  have  always  been  one  of  the  principal  causes  of 
division  between  men,  of  their  hatred  of  one  another,  of 
wars,  battles,  inquisitions,  massacres  of  St.  Bartholomew, 
and  so  on.  And  the  churches  have  never  served  as  media- 
tors between  men  and  God.  Such  mediation  is  not  wanted, 
and  was  directly  forbidden  by  Christ,  who  has  revealed  his 
teaching  directly  and  immediately  to  each  man.  But  the 
churches  set  up  dead  forms  in  the  place  of  God,  and  far 
from  revealing  God,  they  obscure  him  from  men’s  sight. 
The  churches,  which  originated  from  misunderstanding  of 
Christ’s  teaching  and  have  maintained  this  misunderstand- 
ing by  their  immovability,  cannot  but  persecute  and  refuse 
to  recognize  all  true  understanding  of  Christ’s  words. 
They  try  to  conceal  this,  but  in  vain  ; for  every  step  for- 
ward along  the  path  pointed  out  for  us  by  Christ  is  a step 
toward  their  destruction. 

To  hear  and  to  read  the  sermons  and  articles  in  which 
Church  writers  of  later  times  of  all  denominations  speak  of 
Christian  truths  and  virtues  ; to  hear  or  read  these  skillful 
arguments  that  have  been  elaborated  during  centuries,  and 
exhortations  and  professions,  which  sometimes  seem  like 
sincere  professions,  one  is  ready  to  doubt  whether  the 
churches  can  be  antagonistic  to  Christianity.  “ It  cannot 
be,”  one  says,  “ that  these  people  who  can  point  to  such 
men  as  Chrysostom,  Fenelon,  Butler,  and  others  professing 
the  Christian  faith,  were  antagonistic  to  Christianity.” 
One  is  tempted  to  say,  “The  churches  may  have  strayed 
away  from  Christianity,  they  may  be  in  error,  but  they  can- 


70 


” THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


not  be  hostile  to  it.”  But  we  must  look  to  the  fruit  to 
judge  the  tree,  as  Christ  taught  us.  And  if  we  see  that 
their  fruits  were  evil,  that  the  results  of  their  activity  were 
antagonistic  to  Christianity,  we  cannot  but  admit  that  how- 
ever good  the  men  were — the  work  of  the  Church  in  which 
these  men  took  part  was  not  Christian.  The  goodness  and 
worth  of  these  men  who  served  the  churches  was  the  good- 
ness and  worth  of  the  men,  and  not  of  the  institution  they 
served.  All  the  good  men,  such  as  Francis  of  Assisi,  and 
Francis  of  Sales,  our  Tihon  Zadonsky,  Thomas  a Kempis, 
and  others,  were  good  men  in  spite  of  their  serving  an 
institution  hostile  to  Christianit}'^,  and  they  would  have 
been  still  better  if  they  had  not  been  under  the  influence  of 
the  error  which  they  were  serving. 

But  why  should  we  speak  of  the  past  and  judge  from  the 
past,  which  may  have  been  misrepresented  and  misunder- 
stood by  us  ? The  churches,  with  their  principles  and  their 
practice,  are  not  a thing  of  the  past.  The  churches  are 
before  us  to-day,  and  we  can  judge  of  them  to  some  pur- 
pose by  their  practical  activity,  their  influence  on  men. 

What  is  the  practical  work  of  the  churches  to-day? 
What  is  their  influence  upon  men  ? What  is  done  by  the 
churches  among  us,  among  the  Catholics  and  the  Protes- 
tants of  all  denominations — what  is  their  practical  work  ? 
and  what  are  the  results  of  their  practical  work  ? 

The  practice  of  our  Russian  so-called  Orthodox  Church 
is  plain  to  all.  It  is  an  enormous  fact  which  there  is  no 
possibility  of  hiding  and  about  which  there  can  be  no  dis- 
puting. 

What  constitutes  the  practical  work  of  this  Russian 
Church,  this  immense,  intensely  active  institution,  which 
consists  of  a regiment  of  half  a million  men  and  costs  the 
people  tens  of  millions  of  rubles? 

The  practical  business  of  the  Church  consists  in  instill- 
ing by  every  conceivable  means  into  the  mass  of  one  hun- 


IS  WITHIN-  YOU. 


71 


dred  millions  of  the  Russian  people  those  extinct  relics  of 
beliefs  for  which  there  is  nowadays  no  kind  of  justification, 
“ in  which  scarcely  anyone  now  believes,  and  often  not 
even  those  whose  duty  it  is  to  diffuse  these  false  beliefs.” 
To  instill  into  the  people  the  formulas  of  Byzantine 
theology,  of  the  Trinity,  of  the  Mother  of  God,  of  Sacra- 
ments, of  Grace,  and  so  on,  extinct  conceptions,  foreign  to 
us,  and  having  no  kind  of  meaning  for  men  of  our  times, 
forms  only  one  part  of  the  work  of  the  Russian  Church. 
Another  part  of  its  practice  consists  in  the  maintenance  of 
idol-worship  in  the  most  literal  meaning  of  the  word  ; in 
the  veneration  of  holy  relics,  and  of  ikons,  the  offering 
of  sacrifices  to  them,  and  the  expectation  of  their  answers 
to  prayer.  I am  not  going  to  speak  of  what  is  preached 
and  what  is  written  by  clergy  of  scientific  or  liberal  tenden- 
cies  in  the  theological  journals.  I am  going  to  speak  of 
what  is  actually  done  by  the  clergy  through  the  wide 
expanse  of  the  Russian  land  among  a people  of  one  hun- 
dred millions.  What  do  they,  diligently,  assiduously, 
everywhere  alike,  without  intermission,  teach  the  people  ? 
What  do  they  demand  from  the  people  in  virtue  of  their 
(so-called)  Christian  faith  ? 

I will  begin  from  the  beginning  with  the  birth  of  a child. 
At  the  birth  of  a child  they  teach  them  that  they  must 
recite  a prayer  over  the  child  and  mother  to  purify  them, 
as  though  without  this  prayer  the  mother  of  a newborn 
child  were  unclean.  To  do  this  the  priest  holds  the  child 
in  his  arms  before  the  images  of  the  saints  (called  by  the 
people  plainly  gods)  and  reads  words  of  exorcizing  power, 
and  this  purifies  the  mother.  Then  it  is  suggested  to  the 
parents,  and  even  exacted  of  them,  under  fear  of  punish- 
ment for  non-fulfillment,  that  the  child  must  be  baptized  ; 
that  is,  be  dipped  by  the  priest  three  times  into  the  water, 
while  certain  words,  understood  by  no  one,  are  read  aloud, 
and  certain  actions,  still  less  understood,  are  performed  ; 


72 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


various  parts  of  the  body  are  rubbed  with  oil,  and  the  hair 
is  cut,  while  the  sponsors  blow  and  spit  at  an  imaginary 
devil.  All  this  is  necessary  to  purify  the  child  and  to 
make  him  a Christian.  Then  it  is  instilled  into  the  parents 
that  they  ought  to  administer  the  sacrament  to  the  child, 
that  is,  give  him,  in  the  guise  of  bread  and  wine,  a portion 
of  Christ’s  body  to  eat,  as  a result  of  which  the  child 
receives  the  grace  of  God  within  it,  and  so  on.  Then  it 
is  suggested  that  the  child  as  it  grows  up  must  be  taught  to 
pray.  To  pray  means  to  place  himself  directly  before  the 
wooden  boards  on  which  are  painted  the  faces  of  Christ,  the 
Mother  of  God,  and  the  saints,  to  bow  his  head  and  his 
whole  body,  and  to  touch  his  forehead,  his  shoulders  and 
his  stomach  with  his  right  hand,  holding  his  fingers  in  a 
certain  position,  and  to  utter  some  words  of  Slavonic,  the 
most  usual  of  which  as  taught  to  all  children  are  ; Mother 
of  God,  virgin,  rejoice  thee,  etc.,  etc. 

Then  it  is  instilled  into  the  child  as  it  is  brought  up  that 
at  the  sight  of  any  church  or  ikon  he  must  repeat  the  same 
action — i.  e.,  cross  himself.  Then  it  is  instilled  into  him 
that  on  holidays  (holidays  are  the  days  on  which  Christ  was 
born,  though  no  one  knows  when  that  was,  on  which  he 
was  circumcised,  on  which  the  Mother  of  God  died,  on 
which  the  cross  was  carried  in  procession,  on  which  ikons 
have  been  set  up,  on  which  a lunatic  saw  a vision,  and  so 
on) — on  holidays  he  must  dress  himself  in  his  best  clothes 
and  go  to  church,  and  must  buy  candles  and  place  them 
there  before  the  images  of  the  saints.  Then  he  must  give 
offerings  and  prayers  for  the  dead,  and  little  loaves  to  be 
cut  up  into  three-cornered  pieces,  and  must  pray  many 
times  for  the  health  and  prosperity  of  the  Tzar  and  the 
bishops,  and  for  himself  and  his  own  affairs,  and  then  kiss 
the  cross  and  the  hand  of  the  priest. 

Besides  these  observances,  it  is  instilled  into  him  that  at 
least  once  a year  he  must  confess.  To  confess  means  to 


75  WITHIN  YOU. 


73 


go  to  the  church  and  to  tell  the  priest  his  sins,  on  the 
theory  that  this  informing  a stranger  of  his  sins  completely 
purifies  him  from  them.  And  after  that  he  must  eat  with 
a little  spoon  a morsel  of  bread  with  wine,  which  will 
purify  him  still  more.  Next  it  is  instilled  into  him  that  if 
a man  and  woman  want  their  physical  union  to  be  sancti- 
fied they  must  go  to  church,  put  on  metal  crowns,  drink 
certain  potions,  walk  three  times  round  a table  to  the 
sound  of  singing,  and  that  then  the  physical  union  of  a 
man  and  woman  becomes  sacred  and  altogether  different 
from  all  other  such  unions. 

Further  it  is  instilled  into  him  in  his  life  that  he  must 
observe  the  following  rules  : not  to  eat  butter  or  milk  on 
certain  days,  and  on  certain  other  days  to  sing  Te  Deums 
and  requiems  for  the  dead,  on  holidays  to  entertain  the 
priest  and  give  him  money,  and  several  times  in  the  year  to 
bring  the  ikons  from  the  church,  and  to  carry  them  slung 
on  his  shoulders  through  the  fields  and  houses.  It  is  in- 
stilled into  him  that  on  his  death-bed  a man  must  not  fail 
to  eat  bread  and  wine  with  a spoon,  and  that  it  will  be  still 
better  if  he  has  time  to  be  rubbed  with  sacred  oil.  This 
will  guarantee  his  welfare  in  the  future  life.  After  his  death 
it  is  instilled  into  his  relatives  that  it  is  a good  thing  for 
the  salvation  of  the  dead  man  to  place  a printed  paper  of 
prayers  in  his  hands  ; it  is  a good  thing  further  to  read 
aloud  a certain  book  over  the  dead  body,  and  to  pronounce 
the  dead  man’s  name  in  church  at  a certain  time.  All  this 
is  regarded  as  faith  obligatory  on  everyone. 

But  if  anyone  wants  to  take  particular  care  of  his  soul, 
then  according  to  this  faith  he  is  instructed  that  the  great- 
est security  of  the  salvation  of  the  soul  in  the  world  is  at- 
tained by  offering  money  to  the  churches  and  monasteries, 
and  engaging  the  holy  men  by  this  means  to  pray  for  him. 
Entering  monasteries  too,  and  kissing  relics  and  miraculous 
ikons,  are  further  means  of  salvation  for  the  soul. 


74 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


According  to  this  faith  ikons  and  relics  communicate  a 
special  sanctity,  power,  and  grace,  and  even  proximity  to 
these  objects,  touching  them,  kissing  them,  putting  candles 
before  them,  crawling  under  them  while  they  are  being 
carried  along,  are  all  efficacious  for  salvation,  as  well  as 
Te  Deums  repeated  before  these  holy  things. 

So  this,  and  nothing  else,  is  the  faith  called  Orthodox, 
that  is  the  actual  faith  which,  under  the  guise  of  Chris- 
tianity, has  been  with  all  the  forces  of  the  Church,  and  is 
now  with  especial  zeal,  instilled  into  the  people. 

And  let  no  one  say  that  the  Orthodox  teachers  place  the 
essential  part  of  their  teaching  in  something  else,  and  that 
all  these  are  only  ancient  forms,  which  it  is  not  thought 
necessary  to  do  away  with.  That  is  false.  This,  and  noth- 
ing but  this,  is  the  faith  taught  through  the  whole  of  Ru.ssia 
by  the  whole  of  the  Russian  clergy,  and  of  late  years  with 
especial  zeal.  There  is  nothing  else  taught.  Something 
different  may  be  talked  of  and  written  of  in  the  capitals  .; 
but  among  the  hundred  millions  of  the  people  this  is  what 
is  done,  this  is  what  is  taught,  and  nothing  more.  Church- 
men may  talk  of  something  else,  but  this  is  what  they  teach 
by  every  means  in  their  power. 

All  this,  and  the  worship  of  relics  and  of  ikons,  has  been 
introduced  into  works  of  theology  and  into  the  catechisms. 
Thus  they  teach  it  to  the  people  in  theory  and  in  practice, 
using  every  resource  of  authority,  solemnity,  pomp,  and 
violence  to  impress  them.  They  compel  the  people,  by 
overawing  them,  to  believe  in  this,  and  jealously  guard  this 
faith  from  any  attempt  to  free  the  people  from  these  bar- 
barous superstitions. 

As  I said  when  I published  my  book,  Christ’s  teaching 
and  his  very  words  about  non-resistance  to  evil  were  for 
many  years  a subject  for  ridicule  and  low  jesting  in  my 
eyes,  and  Churchmen,  far  from  opposing  it,  even  encour- 
aged  this  scoffing  at  sacred  things.  But  try  the  experiment 


/S  WITHIN  you: 


75 


of  saying  a disrespectful  word  about  a hideous  idol  which  is 
carried  sacrilegiously  about  Moscow  by  drunken  men  under 
the  name  of  the  ikon  of  the  Iversky  virgin,  and  you  will 
raise  a groan  of  indignation  from  these  same  Churchmen. 
All  that  they  preach  is  an  external  observance  of  the  rites 
of  idolatry.  And  let  it  not  be  said  that  the  one  does  not 
hinder  the  other,  that  “ These  ought  ye  to  have  done,  and 
not  to  leave  the  other  undone.”  “All,  therefore,  whatso- 
ever they  bid  you  observe,  that  observe  and  do  ; but  do 
not  ye  after  their  works  : for  they  say,  and  do  not”  (Matt, 
xxiii.  23,  3). 

This  was  spoken  of  the  Pharisees,  who  fulfilled  all  the 
external  observances  prescribed  by  the  law,  and  therefore 
the  words  “ whatsoever  they  bid  you  observe,  that  observe 
and  do,”  refer  to  works  of  mercy  and  goodness,  and  the 
words  “ do  not  ye  after  their  works,  for  they  say  and  do 
not,”  refer  to  their  observance  of  ceremonies  and  their 
neglect  of  good  works,  and  have  exactly  the  opposite  mean- 
ing to  that  which  the  Churchmen  try  to  give  to  the  passage, 
interpreting  it  as  an  injunction  to  observe  ceremonies.  Ex^ 
ternal  observances  and  the  service  of  truth  and  goodness 
are  for  the  most  part  difficult  to  combine  ; the  one  ex- 
cludes the  other.  So  it  was  with  the  Pharisees,  so  it  is 
now  with  Church  Christians. 

If  a man  can  be  saved  by  the  redemption,  by  sacraments, 
and  by  prayer,  then  he  does  not  need  good  works. 

fhe  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  or  the  Creed.  One  cannot 
believe  in  both.  And  Churchmen  have  chosen  the  latt^ 
The  Creed  is  taught  and  is  read  as  a prayer  in  the  churches, 
but  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  is  excluded  even  from  the 
Gospel  passages  read  in  the  churches,  so  that  the  congre- 
gation never  hears  it  in  church,  except  on  those  days  when 
the  whole  of  the  Gospel  is  read.  Indeed,  it  could  not  be 
otherwise.  j^People  who  believe  in  a wicked  and  senseless 
God — who  has  cursed  the  human  race  and  devoted  his  own 


76 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


Son  to  sacrifice,  and  a part  of  mankind  to  eternal  torment 
— cannot  believe  in  the  God  of  love.  The  man  who  be- 
lieves in  a God,  in  a Christ  coming  again  in  glory  to  judge 
and  to  punish  the  quick  and  the  dead,  cannot  believe  in 
the  Christ  who  bade  us  turn  the  left  cheek,  juc^e  not,  for- 
give those  that  wrong  us,  and  love  our  enemies. [ The  man 
who  believes  in  the  inspiration  of  the  Old  Testament  and 
the  sacred  character  of  David,  who  commanded  on  his 
deathbed  the  murder  of  an  old  man  who  had  cursed  him, 
and  whom  he  could  not  kill  himself  because  he  was  bound 
by  an  oath  to  him,  and  the  similar  atrocities  of  which  the 
Old  Testament  is  full,  cannot  believe  in  the  holy  love  of 
Christ.  The  man  who  believes  in  the  Church’s  doctrine  of 
the  compatibility  of  warfare  and  capital  punishment  with 
Christianity  cannot  believe  in  the  brotherhood  of  all  men. 

^nd  what  is  most  important  of  all — the  man  who  believes 
in  salvation  through  faith  in  the  redemption  or  the  sacra- 
ments, cannot  devote  all  his  powers  to  realizing  Christ’s 
moral  teaching  in  his  lilS 

The  man  who  has  been  instructed  by  the  Church  in  the 
profane  doctrine  that  a man  cannot  be  saved  by  his  own 
nowers,  but  that  there  is  another  means  of  salvation,  will 
infallibly  rely  upon  this  means  and  not  on  his  own  powers, 
which,  they  assure  him,  it  is  sinful  to  trust  in. 

The  teaching  of  every  Church,  with  its  redemption  and 
sacraments,  e.xcludes  the  teaching  of  Christ  ; most  of  all 
the  teaching  of  the  Orthodox  Church  with  its  idolatrous 
observances. 

“ But  the  people  have  always  believed  of  their  own 
accord  as  they  believe  now,”  will  be  said  in  answer  to  this. 
“ The  whole  history  of  the  Russian  people  proves  it.  One 
cannot  deprive  the  people  of  their  traditions.”  This  state- 
ment, too,  is  misleading.  The  people  did  certainly  at  one 
time  believe  in  something  like  what  the  Church  believes  in 
now,  though  it  w'as  far  from  being  the  same  thing.  In 


IS  WITHIN  you:' 


77 


spite  of  their  superstitious  regard  for  ikons,  house- 
spirits,  relics,  and  festivals  with  wreaths  of  birch  leaves, 
there  has  still  always  been  in  the  people  a profound  moral 
and  living  understanding  of  Christianity,  which  there  has 
never  been  in  the  Church  as  a whole,  and  which  is  only 
met  with  in  its  best  representatives.  But  the  people,  not- 
withstanding all  the  prejudices  instilled  into  them  by  the 
government  and  the  Church,  have  in  their  best  representa- 
tives long  outgrown  that  crude  stage  of  understanding,  a 
fact  which  is  proved  by  the  springing  up  everywhere  of  the 
rationalist  sects  with  which  Russia  is  swarming  to-day,  and 
on  which  Churchmen  are  now  carrying  on  an  ineffectual 
warfare.  The  people  are  advancing  to  a consciousness  of 
the  moral,  living  side  of  Christianity.  And  then  the  Church 
comes  forward,  not  borrowing  from  the  people,  but  zealously 
instilling  into  them  the  petrified  formalities  of  an  extinct 
paganism,  and  striving  to  thrust  them  back  again  into  the 
darkness  from  which  they  are  emerging  with  such  effort. 

“ We  teach  the  people  nothing  new,  nothing  but  what  they 
believe,  only  in  a more  perfect  form,”  say  the  Churchmen. 
This  is  just  what  the  man  did  who  tied  up  the  full-grown 
chicken  and  thrust  it  back  into  the  shell  it  had  come 
out  of. 

I have  often  been  irritated,  though  it  would  be  comic  if 
the  consequences  were  not  so  awful,  by  observing  how  men 
shut  one  another  in  a delusion  and  cannot  get  out  of  this 
magic  circle. 

The  first  question,  the  first  doubt  of  a Russian  who  is 
beginning  to  think,  is  a question  about  the  ikons,  and  still 
more  the  miraculous  relics:  Is  it  true  that  they  are  genuine, 
and  that  miracles  are  worked  through  them  ? Hundreds 
of  thousands  of  men  put  this  question  to  themselves,  and 
their  principal  difficulty  in  answering  it  is  the  fact  that 
bishops,  metropolitans,  and  all  men  in  positions  of  authority 
kiss  the  relics  and  wonder-working  ikons.  Ask  the  bishops 


78 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


and  men  in  positions  of  authority  why  they  do  so,  and  they 
will  say  they  do  it  for  the  sake  of  the  people,  while  the 
people  kiss  them  because  the  bishops  and  men  in  authority 
do  so. 

In  spite  of  all  the  external  varnish  of  modernitr^  learning, 
and  spirituality  which  the  members  of  the  Church  begin 
nowadays  to  assume  in  their  works,  their  articles,  their 
theological  journals,  and  their  sermons,  the  practical  work 
of  the  Russian  Church  consists  of  nothing  more  than  keep- 
ing the  people  in  their  present  condition  of  coarse  and 
savage  idolatry,  and  tvorse  still,  strengthening  and  diffusing 
superstition  and  religious  ignorance,  and  suppressing  that 
living  understanding  of  Christianity  which  exists  in  the 
people  side  by  side  with  idolatry. 

1 remember  once  being  present  in  the  monks’  bookshop 
of  the  Optchy  Hermitage  while  an  old  peasant  was  choos- 
ing books  for  his  grandson,  who  could  read.  A monk 
pressed  on  him  accounts  of  relics,  holidays,  miraculous 
ikons,  a psalter,  etc.  I asked  the  old  man,  “ Has  he  the 
Gospel?”  “No.”  “ Give  him  the  Gospel  in  Russian,”  I 

said  to  the  monk.  “ That  will  not  do  for  him,”  answered 
the  monk.  There  you  have  an  epitome  of  the  work  of  our 
Church. 

But  this  is  only  in  barbarous  Russia,  the  European  and 
American  reader  will  observe.  And  such  an  observation 
is  just,  but  only  so  far  as  it  refers  to  the  government,  which 
aids  the  Church  in  its  task  of  stultification  and  corruption 
in  Russia. 

It  is  true  that  there  is  nowhere  in  Europe  a government 
so  despotic  and  so  closely  allied  with  the  ruling  Church. 
And  therefore  the  share  of  the  temporal  power  in  the  cor- 
ruption of  the  people  is  greatest  in  Russia.  But  it  is  untrue 
that  the  Russian  Church  in  its  influence  on  the  people  is  in 
any  respect  different  from  any  other  church. 

The  churches  are  everywhere  the  same,  and  if  the 


/S  WITHIN  YOU. 


79 


Catholic,  the  Anglican,  or  the  Lutheran  Church  has  not  at 
hand  a government  as  compliant  as  the  Russian,  it  is  not 
due  to  any  indisposition  to  profit  by  such  a government. 

The  Church  as  a church,  whatever  it  may  be — Catholic, 
Anglican,  Lutheran,  Presbyterian — every  church,  in  so  far 
as  it  is  a church,  cannot  but  strive  for  the  same  object  as 
the  Russian  Church.  That  object  is  to  conceal  the  real 
meaning  of  Christ’s  teaching  and  to  replace  it  by  their 
own,  which  lays  no  obligation  on  them,  e.Kcludes  the  pos- 
sibility of  understanding  the  true  teaching  of  Christ,  and 
what  is  the  chief  consideration,  justifies  the  existence  of 
priests  supported  at  the  people’s  expense. 

What  else  has  Catholicism  done,  what  else  is  it  doing  in 
its  prohibition  of  reading  the  Gospel,  and  in  its  demand  for 
unreasoning  submission  to  Church  authorities  and  to  an 
infallible  Pope  ? Is  the  religion  of  Catholicism  any  other 
than  that  of  the  Russian  Church  ? There  is  the  same 
external  ritual,  the  same  relics,  miracles,  and  wonder-work, 
ing  images  of  Notre  Dame,  and  the  same  processions  ; 
the  same  loftily  vague  discussions  of  Christianity  in  books 
and  sermons,  and  when  it  comes  to  practice,  the  same  sup- 
porting of  the  present  idolatry.  And  is  not  the  same  thing 
done  in  Anglicanism,  Lutheranism,  and  every  denomination 
of  Protestantism  which  has  been  formed  into  a church? 
There  is  the  same  duty  laid  on  their  congregations  to 
believe  in  the  dogmas  expressed  in  the  fourth  century, 
which  have  lost  all  meaning  for  men  of  our  times,  and  the 
same  duty  of  idolatrous  worship,  if  not  of  relics  and  ikons, 
then  of  the  Sabbath  Day  and  the  letter  of  the  Bible.  There 
is  always  the  same  activity  directed  to  concealing  the  real 
duties  of  Christianity,  and  to  putting  in  their  place  an 
external  respectability  and  cant,  as  it  is  so  well  described 
by  the  English,  who  are  peculiarly  oppressed  by  it.  In 
Protestantism  this  tendency  is  specially  remarkable  because 
it  has  not  the  excuse  of  antiquity.  And  does  not  exactly 


8o 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


the  same  thing  show  itself  even  in  contemporary  reviv- 
alism— the  revived  Calvinism  and  Evangelicalism,  to  which 
the  Salvation  Army  owes  its  origin  ? 

Uniform  is  the  attitude  of  all  the  churches  to  the  teach- 
ing of  Christ,  whose  name  they  assume  for  their  own 
advantage. 

The  inconsistency  of  all  church  forms  of  religion  with 
the  teaching  of  Christ  is,  of  course,  the  reason  why  special 
efforts  are  necessary  to  conceal  this  inconsistency  from 
people.  Truly,  we  need  only  imagine  ourselves  in  the 
position  of  any  grown-up  man,  not  necessarily  educated, 
even  the  simplest  man  of  the  present  day,  who  has  picked 
up  the  ideas  that  are  everywhere  in  the  air  nowadays  of 
geology,  physics,  chemistry,  cosmography,  or  history,  when 
he,  for  the  first  time,  consciously  compares  them  with  the 
articles  of  belief  instilled  into  him  in  childhood,  and  main- 
tained by  the  churches — that  God  created  the  world  in  six 
days,  and  light  before  the  sun  ; that  Noah  shut  up  all  the 
animals  in  his  ark,  and  so  on  ; that  Jesus  is  also  God  the 
Son,  who  created  all  before  time  was  ; that  this  God  came 
down  upon  earth  to  atone  for  Adam’s  sin  ; that  he  rose 
again,  ascended  into  heaven,  and  sitteth  on  the  right  hand  of 
the  Father,  and  will  come  in  the  clouds  to  judge  the  world, 
and  so  on.  All  these  propositions,  elaborated  by  men  of 
the  fourth  century,  had  a certain  meaning  for  men  of  that 
time,  but  for  men  of  to-day  they  have  no  meaning  what- 
ever. Men  of  the  present  day  can  repeat  these  words  with 
their  lips,  but  believe  them  they  cannot.  For  such  sen- 
tences as  that  God  lives  in  heaven,  that  the  heavens  opened 
and  a voice  from  somewhere  said  something,  that  Christ 
rose  again,  and  ascended  somewhere  in  heaven,  and  again 
will  come  from  somewhere  on  the  clouds,  and  so  on,  have 
no  meaning  for  us. 

A man  who  regarded  the  heavens  as  a solid,  finite  vault 
could  believe  or  disbelieve  that  God  created  the  heavens. 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


that  the  heavens  opened,  that  Christ  ascended  into  heaven, 
but  for  us  all  these  phrases  have  no  sense  whatever.  Men 
of  the  present  can  only  believe,  as  indeed  they  do,  that  they 
ought  to  believe  in  this  ; but  believe  it  they  cannot,  because 
it  has  no  meaning  for  them. 

Even  if  all  these  phrases  ought  to  be  interpreted  in  a 
figurative  sense  and  are  allegories,  we  know  that  in  the 
first  place  all  Churchmen  are  not  agreed  about  it,  but,  on 
the  contrary,  the  majority  stick  to  understanding  the  Holy 
Scripture  in  its  literal  sense  ; and  secondly,  that  these 
allegorical  interpretations  are  very  varied  and  are  not  sup- 
ported by  any  evidence. 

But  even  if  a man  wants  to  force  himself  to  believe  in 
tlie  doctrines  of  the  Church  just  as  they  are  taught  to  him, 
the  universal  diffusion  of  education  and  of  the  Gospel  and 
of  communication  between  people  of  different  forms  of 
religion  presents  a still  more  insurmountable  obstacle  to 
his  doing  so. 

A man  of  the  present  day  need  only  buy  a Gospel  for 
three  copecks  and  read  through  the  plain  words,  admitting 
of  no  misinterpretation,  that  Christ  said  to  the  Samaritan 
woman  “ that  the  Father  seeketh  not  worshipers  at 
Jerusalem,  nor  in  this  mountain  nor  in  that,  but  wor- 
shipers in  spirit  and  in  truth,”  or  the  saying  that  “the 
Christian  must  not  pray  like  the  heathen,  nor  for  show,  but 
secretly,  that  is,  in  his  closet,”  or  that  Christ’s  follower 
must  call  no  man  master  or  father — he  need  only  read 
these  words  to  be  thoroughly  convinced  that  the  Church 
pastors,  who  call  themselves  teachers  in  opposition  to 
Christ’s  precept,  and  dispute  among  themselves,  constitute 
no  kind  of  authority,  and  that  what  the  Churchmen  teach 
us  is  not  Christianity.  Less  even  than  that  is  necessary. 
Even  if  a man  nowadays  did  continue  to  believe  in  miracles 
and  did  not  read  the  Gospel,  mere  association  with  people 
of  different  forms  of  religion  and  faith,  which  happens  so 


82 


THE  KIHGDOM  OF  GOD 


easily  in  these  days,  compels  him  to  doubt  of  the  truth  of 
his  own  faith.  It  was  all  very  well  when  a man  did  not  see 
men  of  any  other  form  of  religion  than  his  own  ; he  believed 
that  his  form  of  religion  was  the  one  true  one.  But  a 
thinking  man  has  only  to  come  into  contact — as  constantly 
happens  in  these  days — with  people,  equally  good  and  bad, 
of  different  denominations,  who  condemn  each  other’s 
beliefs,  to  doubt  of  the  truth  of  the  belief  he  professes  him- 
self. In  these  days  only  a man  who  is  absolutely  ignorant 
or  absolutely  indifferent  to  the  vital  questions  with  which 
religion  deals,  can  remain  in  the  faith  of  the  Church. 

What  deceptions  and  what  strenuous  efforts  the  churches 
must  employ  to  continue,  in  spite  of  all  these  tendencies 
subversive  of  the  faith,  to  build  churches,  to  perform  masses, 
to  preach,  to  teach,  to  convert,  and,  most  of  all,  to  receive 
for  it  all  immense  emoluments,  as  do  all  these  priests, 
pastors,  incumbents,  superintendents,  abbots,  archdeacons, 
bishops,  and  archbishops.  They  need  special  supernatural 
efforts.  And  the  churches  do,  with  ever-increasing  inten- 
sity and  zeal,  make  such  efforts.  With  us  in  Russia, 
besides  other  means,  they  employ  simple  brute  force,  as 
there  the  temporal  power  is  willing  to  obey  the  Church. 
Men  who  refuse  an  external  assent  to  the  faith,  and  say  so 
openly,  are  either  directly  punished  or  deprived  of  their 
rights ; men  who  strictly  keep  the  external  forms  of 
religion  are  rewarded  and  given  privileges. 

That  is  how  the  Orthodox  clergy  proceed  ; but  indeed 
all  churches  without  exception  avail  themselves  of  every 
means  for  the  purpose — one  of  the  most  important  of  which 
is  what  is  now  called  hypnotism. 

Every  art,  from  architecture  to  poetry,  is  brought  into 
requisition  to  work  its  effect  on  men’s  s’ouls  and  to  reduce 
them  to  a state  of  stupefaction,  and  this  effect  is  constantly 
produced.  This  use  of  hypnotizing  influence  on  men  to 
bring  them  to  a state  of  stupefaction  is  especially  apparent 


IS  WITHIN  you:' 


83 


in  the  proceedings  of  the  Salvation  Arm}>-,  who  employ  new 
practices  to  which  we  are  unaccustomed  ; trumpets,  drums, 
songs,  flags,  costumes,  marching,  dancing,  tears,  and 
dramatic  performances. 

But  this  only  displeases  us  because  these  are  new 
practices.  Were  not  the  old  practices  in  churches  essen- 
tially the  same,  with  their  special  lighting,  gold,  splendor, 
candies,  choirs,  organ,  bells,  vestments,  intoning,  etc.? 

But  however  powerful  this  hypnotic  influence  may  be,  it 
is  not  the  chief  nor  the  most  pernicious  activity  of  the 
Church.  The  chief  and  most  pernicious  work  of  the 
Church  is  that  which  is  directed  to  the  deception  of 
children — these  very  children  of  whom  Christ  said  : “Woe 
to  him  that  offendeth  one  of  these  little  ones.”  From  the 
very  first  awakening  of  the  consciousness  of  the  child  they 
begin  to  deceive  him,  to  instill  into  him  with  the  utmost 
solemnity  what  they  do  not  themselves  believe  in,  and  they 
continue  to  instill  it  into  him  till  the  deception  has  by 
habit  grown  into  the  child’s  nature.  They  studiously  de- 
ceive the  child  on  the  most  important  subject  in  life,  and 
when  the  deception  has  so  grown  into  his  life  that  it  would 
be  difficult  to  uproot  it,  then  they  reveal  to  him  the  whole 
world  of  science  and  reality,  which  cannot  by  any  means  be 
reconciled  with  the  beliefs  that  have  been  instilled  into 
him,  leaving  it  to  him  to  find  his  way  as  best  he  can  out  of 
these  contradictions. 

If  one  set  oneself  the  task  of  trying  to  confuse  a man 
so  that  he  could  not  think  clearl}’’  nor  free  himself  from  the 
perple.\ity  of  two  opposing  theories  of  life  which  had  been 
instilled  into  him  from  childhood,  one  could  not  invent  any 
means  more  effectual  than  the  treatment  of  every  young 
man  educated  in  our  so-called  Christian  society. 

It  is  terrible  to  think  what  the  churches  do  to  men.  But 
if  one  imagines  oneself  in  the  position  of  the  men  who 
constitute  the  Church,  we  see  they  could  not  act  differ- 


84 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


ent!}'.  The  churches  are  placed  in  a dilemma  : the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount  or  the  Nicene  Creed — the  one 
excludes  the  other.  If  a man  sincerely  believes  in  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  the  Nicene  Creed  must  inevitably 
lose  all  meaning  and  significance  for  him,  and  the  Church 
and  its  representatives  together  with  it.  If  a man  believes 
in  the  Nicene  Creed,  that  is,  in  the  Church,  that  is,  in  those 
who  call  themselves  its  representativ.es,  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  becomes  superfluous  for  him.  And  therefore  the 
churches  cannot  but  make  every  possible  effort  to  obscure 
the  meaning  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  and  to  attract 
men  to  themselves.  It  is  only  due  to  the  intense  zeal  of 
the  churches  in  this  direction  that  the  influence  of  the 
churches  has  lasted  hitherto. 

I Let  the  Church  stop  its  work  of  hypnotizing  the  masses, 
and  deceiving  children  even  for  the  briefest  interval  of 
time,  and  men  would  begin  to  understand  Christ’s  teach- 
ing. But  this  understanding  will  be  the  end  of  the 
churches  and  all  their  influence.  And  therefore  the 
churches  will  not  for  an  instant  relax  their  zeal  in  the 
•J  business  of  hypnotizing  grown-up  people  and  deceiving 
children.  This,  then,  is  the  work  of  the  churches  ; to 
instill  a false  interpretation  of  Christ’s  teaching  into  men, 
, and  to  prevent  a true  interpretation  of  it  for  the  majority 
/ of  so-called  believers. 


/S  WITHIN  YOU. 


8S 


CHAPTER  IV. 

CHRISTIANITY  MISUNDERSTOOD  BY  MEN  OF  SCIENCE. 

Attitude  of  Men  of  Science  to  Religions  in  General — What  Religion  is, 
and  What  is  its  Significance  for  the  Life  of  Humanity — Three  Concep- 
tions of  Life — Christian  Religion  the  Expression  of  the  Divine  Con- 
ception of  Life — Misinterpretation  of  Christianity  by  Men  of  Science, 
who  Study  it  in  its  External  Manifestations  Due  to  their  Criticising  it 
from  Standpoint  of  Social  Conception  of  Life — Opinion,  Resulting 
from  this  Misinterpretation,  that  Christ’s  Moral  Teaching  is  Exagger- 
ated and  Cannot  be  put  into  Practice — Expression  of  Divine  Conception 
of  Life  in  the  Gospel — False  Ideas  of  Men  of  Science  on  Christianity 
Proceed  from  their  Conviction  that  they  have  an  Infallible  Method  of 
Criticism — From  which  come  Two  Misconceptions  in  Regard  to  Chris- 
tian Doctrine — First  Misconception,  that  the  Teaching  Cannot  be  put 
into  Practice,  Due  to  the  Christian  Religion  Directing  Life  in  a Way 
Different  from  that  of  the  Social  Theory  of  Life — Christianity  holds 
up  Ideal,  does  not  lay  down  Rules — To  the  Animal  Force  of  Man 
Christ  Adds  the  Consciousness  of  a Divine  Force — Christianity  Seems 
to  Destroy  Possibility  of  Life  only  when  the  Ideal  held  up  is  Mistaken 
for  Rule — Ideal  Must  Not  be  Lowered — Life,  According  to  Christ’s 
Teaching,  is  Movement — The  Ideal  and  the  Precepts — Second  Mis- 
conception Shown  in  Replacing  Love  and  Service  of  God  by  Love  and 
Service  of  Humanity — Men  of  Science  Imagine  their  Doctrine  of 
Service  of  Humanity  and  Christianity  are  Identical — Doctrine  of 
Service  of  Humanity  Based  on  Social  Conception  of  Life — Love  for 
Humanity,  Logically  Deduced  from  Love  of  Self,  has  No  Meaning 
because  Humanity  is  a Fiction — Christian  Love  Deduced  from  Love 
of  God,  Finds  its  Object  in  the  whole  World,  not  in  Humanity  Alone 
— Christianity  Teaches  Man  to  Live  in  Accordance  with  his  Divine 
Nature — It  Shows  that  the  Essence  of  the  Soul  of  Man  is  Love,  and 
that  his  Happiness  Ensues  from  Love  of  God,  whom  he  Recognizes  as 
Love  within  himself. 

Now  I will  speak  of  the  other  view  of  Christianity  which 
hinders  the  true  understanding  of  it — the  scientific  view. 

Churchmen  substitute  for  Christianity  the  version  they 
have  framed  of  it  for  themselves,  and  this  view  of  Chris- 
tianity they  regard  as  the  one  infallibly  true  one. 


86 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


Men  of  science  regard  as  Cliristianity  only  the  tenets 
held  by  the  different  churches  in  the  past  and  present ; and 
finding  that  tliese  tenets  have  lost  all  the  significance  of 
Christianity,  they  accept  it  as  a religion  which  has  out- 
lived its  age. 

To  see  clearly  how  impossible  it  is  to  understand  the 
Christian  teaching  from  such  a point  of  view,  one  must 
form  for  oneself  an  idea  of  the  place  actually  held  by 
religions  in  general,  by  the  Christian  religion  in  particular, 
in  the  life  of  mankind,  and  of  the  significance  attributed 
to  them  by  science. 

Just  as  the  individual  man  cannot  live  without  having 
some  theory  of  the  meaning  of  his  life,  and  is  always, 
though  often  unconsciously,  framing  his  conduct  in  accord- 
ance with  the  meaning  he  attributes  to  his  life,  so  too  asso- 
ciations of  men  living  in  similar  conditions — nations — can- 
not but  have  theories  of  the  meaning  of  their  associated 
life  and  conduct  ensuing  from  those  theories.  And  as  the 
individual  man,  when  he  attains  a fresh  stage  of  growth, 
inevitably  changes  his  philosophy  of  life,  and  the  grown- 
up man  sees  a different  meaning  in  it  from  the  child, 
so  too  associations  of  men — nations — are  bound  to 
change  their  philosophy  of  life  and  the  conduct  ensuing 
from  their  philosophy,  to  correspond  with  their  develop, 
ment. 

The  difference,  as  regards  this,  between  the  individual 
man  and  humanity  as  a whole,  lies  in  the  fact  that  the 
individual,  in  forming  the  view  of  life  proper  to  the  new 
period  of  life  on  which  he  is  entering  and  the  conduct 
resulting  from  it,  benefits  by  the  experience  of  men  who 
have  lived  before  him,  who  have  already  passed  through 
the  stage  of  growth  upon  which  he  is  entering.  But 
humanity  cannot  have  this  aid,  because  it  is  always  moving 
along  a hitherto  untrodden  track,  and  has  no  one  to  ask 
how  to  understand  life,  and  to  act  in  the  conditions  on 


IS  WITHIN  YOU."  87 

which  it  is  entering  and  through  which  no  one  has  ever 
passed  before. 

Nevertheless,  just  as  a man  with  wife  and  children  can- 
not continue  to  look  at  life  as  he  looked  at  it  when  he  was 
a child,  so  too  in  the  face  of  the  various  changes  that  are 
taking  place,  the  greater  density  of  population,  the  estab- 
lishment of  communication  between  different  peoples,  the 
improvements  of  the  methods  of  the  struggle  with  nature, 
and  the  accumulation  of  knowledge,  humanity  cannot  con- 
tinue to  look  at  life  as  of  old,  and  it  must  frame  a new 
theory  of  life,  from  which  conduct  may  follow  adapted 
to  the  new  conditions  on  which  it  has  entered  and  is 
entering. 

To  meet  this  need  humanity  has  the  special  power  of 
producing  men  who  give  a new  meaning  to  the  whole  of 
human  life— a theory  of  life  from  which  follow  new  forms 
of  activity  quite  different  from  all  preceding  them.  The 
formation  of  this  philosophy  of  life  appropriate  to 
humanity  in  the  new  conditions  on  which  it  is  entering,  and 
of  the  practice  resulting  from  it,  is  what  is  called  religion. 

And  therefore,  in  the  first  place,  religion  is  not,  as 
science  imagines,  a manifestation  which  at  one  time  cor- 
responded with  the  development  of  humanity,  but  is  after- 
ward outgrown  by  it.  It  is  a manifestation  always  inherent 
in  the  life  of  humanity,  and  is  as  indispensable,  as  inherent 
in  humanity  at  the  present  time  as  at  any  other.  Secondly, 
religion  is  always  the  theory  of  the  practice  of  the  future 
and  not  of  the  past,  and  therefore  it  is  clear  that  investiga- 
tion of  past  manifestations  cannot  in  any  case  grasp  the 
essence  of  religion. 

The  essence  of  every  religious  teaching  lies  not  in  the 
desire  for  a symbolic  expression  of  the  forces  of  nature, 
nor  in  the  dread  of  these  forces,  nor  in  the  craving  for 
the  marvelous,  nor  in  the  external  forms  in  which  it  is 
manifested,  as  men  of  science  imagine ; the  essence  of 


88 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  COD 


religion  lies  in  the  faculty  of  men  of  foreseeing  and  point- 
ing out  the  path  of  life  along  which  humanity  must  move 
in  the  discovery  of  a new  theory  of  life,  as  a result  of  which 
the  whole  future  conduct  of  humanity  is  changed  and  dif- 
ferent from  all  that  has  been  before. 

This  faculty  of  foreseeing  the  path  along  which  humanity 
must  move,  is  common  in  a greater  or  less  degree  to  all 
men.  But  in  all  times  there  have  been  men  in  whom  this 
faculty  was  especially  strong,  and  these  men  have  given 
clear  and  definite  expression  to  what  all  men  felt  vaguely, 
and  formed  a new  philosophy  of  life  from  which  new  lines 
of  action  followed  for  hundreds  and  thousands  of  years. 

Of  such  philosophies  of  life  we  know  three  ; two  have 
already  been  passed  through  by  humanity,  and  the  third  is 
that  we  are  passing  through  now  in  Christianity.  These 
philosophies  of  life  are  three  in  number,  and  only  three, 
not  because  we  have  arbitrarily  brought  the  various 
theories  of  life  together  under  these  three  heads,  but 
because  all  men’s  actions  are  always  based  on  one  of  these 
three  views  of  life — because  we  cannot  view  life  otherwise 
than  in  these  three  ways. 

These  three  views  of  life  are  as  follows  : First,  embrac- 
ing the  individual,  or  the  animal  view  of  life  ; second, 
embracing  the  society,  or  the  pagan  view  of  life  ; third, 
embracing  the  whole  world,  or  the  divine  view  of  life. 

In  the  first  theory  of  life  a man’s  life  is  limited  to  his  one 
individuality  ; the  aim  of  life  is  the  satisfaction  of  the  will 
of  this  individuality.  In  the  second  theory  of  life  a man’s 
life  is  limited  not  to  his  own  individuality,  but  to  certain 
societies  and  classes  of  individuals  : to  the  tribe,  the  family, 
the  clan,  the  nation  ; the  aim  of  life  is  limited  to  the  satis- 
faction of  the  will  of  those  associations  of  individuals.  In 
the  third  theory  of  life  a man’s  life  is  limited  not  to  socie- 
ties and  classes  of  individuals,  but  extends  to  the  principle 
and  source  of  life — to  God. 


/S  WITHIN  YOU."  89 

These  three  conceptions  of  life  form  the  foundation  of 
all  the  religions  that  exist  or  have  existed. 

The  savage  recognizes  life  only  in  himself  and  his  per- 
sonal desires.  His  interest  in  life  is  concentrated  on  him- 
self alone.  The  highest  happiness  for  him  is  the  fullest 
satisfaction  of  his  desires.  The  motive  power  of  his  life  is 
personal  enjoyment.  His  religion  consists  in  propitiating 
his  deity  and  in  worshiping  his  gods,  whom  he  imagines  as 
persons  living  only  for  their  personal  aims. 

The  civilized  pagan  recognizes  life  not  in  himself  alone, 
but  in  societies  of  men — in  the  tribe,  the  clan,  the  family, 
the  kingdom — and  sacrifices  his  personal  good  for  these 
societies.  The  motive  power  of  his  life  is  glory.  His 
religion  consists  in  the  exaltation  of  the  glory  of  those  who 
are  allied  to  him — the  founders  of  his  family,  his  ancestors, 
his  rulers — and  in  worshiping  gods  who  are  exclusively  pro- 
tectors of  his  clan,  his  family,  his  nation,  his  government.* 

The  man  who  holds  the  divine  theory  of  life  recognizes 
life  not  in  his  own  individuality,  and  not  in  societies  of 
individualities  (in  the  family,  the  clan,  the  nation,  the  tribe, 
or  the  government),  but  in  the  eternal  undying  source  of 
life — in  God  ; and  to  fulfill  the  will  of  God  he  is  ready  to 
sacrifice  his  individual  and  family  and  social  welfare.  The 
motor  power  of  his  life  is  love.  And  his  religion  is  the 
worship  in  deed  and  in  truth  of  the  principle  of  the  whole — 
God. 

The  whole  historic  existence  of  mankind  is  nothing  else 
than  the  gradual  transition  from  the  personal,  animal  con- 

* The  fact  that  so  many  varied  forms  of  existence,  as  the  life  of  the 
family,  of  the  tribe,  of  the  clan,  of  the  state,  and  even  the  life  of  human- 
ity theoretically  conceived  by  the  Positivists,  are  founded  on  this  social 
or  pagan  theory  of  life,  does  not  destroy  the  unity  of  this  theory  of  life. 
All  these  varied  forms  of  life  are  founded  on  the  same  conception,  that 
the  life  of  the  individual  is  not  a sufficient  aim  of  life — that  the  meaning 
of  life  can  be  found  only  in  societies  of  individuals. 


90 


*’  THE  TaNGDOM  OF  GOD 


ception  of  life  to  the  social  conception  of  life,  and  from  the 
social  conception  of  life  to  the  divine  conception  of  life. 
The  whole  history  of  the  ancient  peoples,  lasting  through 
thousands  of  years  and  ending  with  the  history  of  Rome,  is 
the  history  of  the  transition  from  the  animal,  personal  view 
of  life  to  the  social  view  of  life.  The  whole  of  history 
from  the  time  of  the  Roman  Empire  and  the  appearance  of 
Christianity  is  the  history  of  the  transition,  through  Avhich 
we  are  still  passing  now,  from  the  social  view  of  life  to  the 
divine  view  of  life. 

This  view  of  life  is  the  last,  and  founded  upon  it  is  the 
Christian  teaching,  which  is  a guide  for  the  whole  of  our 
life  and  lies  at  the  root  of  all  our  activity,  practical  and 
theoretic.  Yet  men  of  what  is  falsely  called  science, 
pseudo-scientific  men,  looking  at  it  only  in*  its  e.xternals, 
regard  it  as  something  outgrown  and  having  • no- value 
for  us. 

Reducing  it  to  its  dogmatic  side  only — to  the  doctrines 
of  the  Trinity,  the  redemption,  the  miracles,  the  Church, 
the  sacraments,  and  so  on — men  of  science  regard  it  as 
only  one  of  an  immense  number  of  religions  which  have 
arisen  among  mankind,  and  now,  they  say,  having  played 
out  its  part  in  history,  it  is  outliving  its  own  age  and  fading 
away  before  the  light  of  science  and  of  true  enlightenment. 

AVe  come  here  upon  what,  in  a large  proportion  of  cases, 
forms  the  source  of  the  grossest  errors  of  mankind.  Men 
on  a lower  level  of  understanding,  when  brought  into 
contact  with  phenomena  of  a higher  order,  instead  of 
making  efforts  to  understand  them,  to  raise  themselves  up 
to  the  point  of  view  from  which  they  must  look  at  the  sub- 
ject, judge  it  from  their  lower  standpoint,  and  the  less  they 
understand  what  they  are  talking  about,  the  more  con- 
fidently and  unhesitatingly  they  pass  judgment  on  it. 

To  the  majority  of  learned  men,  looking  at  the  living, 
moral  teaching  of  Christ  from  the  lower  standpoint  of  the 


/S  WITHIN  YOU." 


91 


State  conception  of  life,  this  doctrine  appears  as  nothing  but 
a very  indefinite  and  incongruous  combination  of  Indian 
asceticism,  Stoic  and  Neoplatonic  philosophy,  and  insub- 
stantial anti-social  visions,  which  have  no  serious  sig- 
nificance for  our  times.  Its  whole  meaning  is  con- 
centrated for  them  in  its  external  manifestations — in 
Catholicism,  Protestantism,  in  certain  dogmas,  or  in  the 
conflict  with  the  temporal  power.  Estimating  the  value  of 
Christianity  by  these  phenomena  is  like  a deaf  man’s  judg- 
ing of  the  character  and  quality  of  music  by  seeing  the 
movements  of  the  musicians. 

The  result  of  this  is  that  all  these  scientific  men,  from 
Kant,  Strauss,  Spencer,  and  Renan  down,  do  not  under- 
stand the  meaning  of  Christ’s  sayings,  do  not  under- 
stand the  significance,  the  object,.or  the  reason  of  their 
utterance,  do  not  understand  even  the  question  to  which 
they  form  the  answer.  Yet,  without  even  taking  the  pains 
to  enter  into  their  meaning,  they  refuse,  if  unfavorably  dis- 
posed, to  recognize  any  reasonableness  in  his  doctrines  ; or 
if  they  want  to  treat  them  indulgently,  they  condescend, 
from  the  height  of  their  superiority,  to  correct  them,  on  the 
supposition  that  Christ  meant  to  express  precisely  their  own 
ideas,  but  did  not  succeed  in  doing  so.  They  behave  to 
his  teaching  much  as  self-assertive  people  talk  to  those 
whom  they  consider  beneath  them,  often  supplying  their 
companions’  words : “ Yes,  you  mean  to  say  this  and 
that.”  This  correction  is  always  with  the  aim  of  reduc- 
ing the  teaching  of  the  higher,  divine  conception  of  life 
to  the  level  of  the  lower,  state  conception  of  life. 

They  usually  say  that  the  moral  teaching  of  Christianity 
is  very  fine,  but  overexaggerated  ; that  to  make  it  quite 
right  we  must  reject  all  in  it  that  is  superfluous  and  un- 
necessary to  our  manner  of  life.  “ And  the  doctrine  that 
asks  too  much,  and  requires  what  cannot  be  performed,  is 
worse  than  that  which  requires  of  men  what  is  possible  and 


92 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


consistent  with  their  powers,”  these  learned  interpreters  of 
Christianity  maintain,  repeating  what  was  long  ago  asserted, 
and  could  not  but  be  asserted,  by  those  who  crucified  the 
Teacher  because  they  did  not  understand  him — the  Jews. 

It  seems  that  in  the  judgment  of  the  learned  men  of  our 
time  the  Hebrew  law — a tooth  for  a tooth,  and  an  eye  for 
an  eye — is  a law  of  just  retaliation,  known  to  mankind  five 
thousand  years  before  the  law  of  holiness  which  Christ 
taught  in  its  place. 

It  seems  that  all  that  has  been  done  by  those  men  who 
understood  Christ’s  teaching  literally  and  lived  in  accord- 
ance with  such  an  understanding  of  it,  all  that  has  been 
said  and  done  by  all  true  Christians,  by  all  the  Christian 
saints,  all  that  is  now  reforming  the  world  in  the  shape  of 
socialism  and  communism — is  simply  exaggeration,  not 
worth  talking  about. 

After  eighteen  hundred  years  of  education  in  Christianity 
the  civilized  world,  as  represented  by  its  most  advanced 
thinkers,  holds  the  conviction  that  the  Christian  religion  is 
a religion  of  dogmas  ; that  its  teaching  in  relation  to  life  is 
unreasonable,  and  is  an  exaggeration,  subversive  of  the 
real  lawful  obligations  of  morality  consistent  with  the 
nature  of  man  ; and  that  very  doctrine  of  retribution  which 
Christ  rejected,  and  in  place  of  which  he  put  his  teaching, 
is  more  practically  useful  for  us. 

To  learned  men  the  doctrine  of  non-resistance  to  evil  by 
force  is  exaggerated  and  even  irrational.  Christianity  is 
much  better  without  it,  they  think,  not  observing  closely 
what  Christianity,  as  represented  by  them,  amounts  to. 

They  do  not  see  that  to  say  that  the  doctrine  of  non- 
resistance  to  evil  is  an  exaggeration  in  Christ’s  teaching  is 
just  like  saying  that  the  statement  of  the  equality  of  the 
radii  of  a circle  is  an  exaggeration  in  the  definition  of  a 
circle.  And  those  who  speak  thus  are  acting  precisely  like 
a man  who,  having  no  idea  of  what  a circle  is,  should  declare 


75  WITHIN  YOU. 


93 


that  this  requirement,  that  every  point  of  the  circumference 
should  be  an  equal  distance  from  the  center,  is  exaggerated. 
To  advocate  the  rejection  of  Christ’s  command  of  non- 
resistance  to  evil,  or  its  adaptation  to  the  needs  of  life, 
implies  a misunderstanding  of  the  teaching  of  Christ. 

And  those  who  do  so  certainly  do  not  understand  it. 
They  do  not  understand  that  this  teaching  is  the  institution 
of  a new  theory  of  life,  corresponding  to  the  new  conditions 
on  which  men  have  entered  now  for  eighteen  hundred 
years,  and  also  the  definition  of  the  new  conduct  of  life 
which  results  from  it.  They  do  not  believe  that  Christ 
meant  to  say  what  he  said  ; or  he  seems  to  them  to  have 
said  what  he  said  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  and  in  other 
places  accidentally,  or  through  his  lack  of  intelligence  or 
of  cultivation.* 

Matt.  vi.  25-34:  “Therefore  I say  unto  you,  Take  no 
thought  for  your  life,  what  ye  shall  eat,  or  what  ye  shall 

* Here,  for  example,  is  a characteristic  view  of  that  kind  from  the 

American  journal  the  (October,  1890):  “New  Basis  of  Church 

Life.”*  Treating  of  the  significance  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  and  non- 
resistance  to  evil  in  particular,  the  author,  being  under  no  necessity,  like 
the  Churchmen,  to  hide  its  significance,  sa)'s  : 

* ‘ Christ  in  fact  preached  complete  communism  and  anarchy  ; but  one 
must  learn  to  regard  Christ  always  in  his  historical  and  psychological 
significance.  Like  every  advocate  of  the  love  of  humanity,  Christ  went 
to  the  furthest  extreme  in  his  teaching.  Every  step  forward  toward  the 
moral  perfection  of  humanity  is  always  guided  by  men  who  see  nothing 
but  their  vocation.  Christ,  in  no  disparaging  sense  be  it  said,  had  the 
typical  temperament  of  such  a reformer.  And  therefore  we  must  remem- 
ber that  his  precepts  cannot  be  understood  literally  as  a complete 
philosophy  of  life.  We  ought  to  analyze  his  words  with  respect  for 
them,  but  in  the  spirit  of  criticism,  accepting  what  is  true,”  etc. 

Christ  would  have  been  happy  to  say  what  he  ought,  but  he  was  not 
able  to  express  himself  as  exactly  and  clearly  as  we  can  in  the  spirit  of 
criticism,  and  therefore  let  us  correct  him.  All  that  he  said  about 
meekness,  sacrifice,  lowliness,  not  caring  for  the  morrow,  was  said  by 
accident,  through  lack  of  knowing  how  to  express  himself  scientifically. 


94 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


drink  ; nor  yet  for  your  bod)',  what  ye  shall  put  on.  Is  not 
the  life  more  than  meat,  and  the  body  than  raiment  ? Be- 
hold the  fowls  of  the  air;  for  they  sow  not,  neither  do  they 
reap,  nor  gather  into  barns;  yet  your  heavenly  Father 
feedelh  them.  Are  ye  not  much  better  than  they  ? Which  of 
you  by  taking  thought  can  add  one  cubit  unto  his  stature  ? 
And  why  take  ye  thought  for  raiment  ? Consider  the  lilies  of 
the  field  how  they  grow  ; they  toil  not,  neither  do  they  spin  ; 
and  yet  I say  unto  you.  That  even  Solomon  in  all  his  glory 
was  not  arrayed  like  one  of  these.  Wherefore,  if  God  so 
clothe  the  grass  of  the  field,  which  to-day  is,  and  to-morrow 
is  cast  into  the  oven,  shall  he  not  much  more  clothe 
you,  O ye  of  little  faith  ? Therefore  take  no  thought,  saying, 
What  shall  we  eat  ? or.  What  shall  we  drink  ? or.  Where- 
withal shall  we  be  clothed  ? (For  after  ail  these  things  do 
the  Gentiles  seek),  for  your  heavenly  Father  knoweth  that 
ye  have  need  of  all  these  things.  But  seek  ye  first  the  king- 
dom of  God,  and  his  righteousness,  and  all  these  things 
shall  be  added  unto  you.  Take  therefore  no  thought  for 
the  morrow ; for  the  morrow  shall  take  thought  for  the 
things  of  itself.  Sufficient  unto  the  day  is  the  evil  thereof.” 
Luke  xii.  33-34  : “ Sell  that  ye  have,  and  give  alms  ; pro- 
vide yourselves  bags  which  wax  not  old,  a treasure  in  the 
heavens  that  faileth  not,  where  no  thief  approacheth,  neither 
moth  corrupteth.  For  where  your  treasure  is,  there  will 
your  heart  be  also.”  Sell  all  thou  hast  and  follow  me  ; and 
he  who  will  not  leave  father,  or  mother,  or  children,  or 
brothers,  or  fields,  or  house,  he  cannot  be  my  disciple. 
Deny  thyself,  take  up  thy  cross  each  day  and  follow  me. 
My  meat  is  to  do  the  will  of  him  that  sent  me,  and  to  per- 
form his  works.  Not  my  will,  but  thine  be  done  ; not 
what  I will,  but  as  thou  wilt.  Life  is  to  do  not  one's  will, 
but  the  will  of  God. 

All  these  principles  appear  to  men  who  regard  them 
from  the  standpoint  of  a lower  conception  of  life  as  the 


/S  WITHIN  YOU. 


95 


expression  of  an  impulsive  enthusiasm,  having  no  direct 
application  to  life.  These  principles,  however,  follow  from 
the  Christian  theory  of  life,  just  as  logically  as  the  prin- 
ciples of  paying  a part  of  one’s  private  gains  to  the  com- 
monwealth and  of  sacrificing  one’s  life  in  defense  of  one’s 
country  follow  from  the  state  theory  of  life. 

As  the  man  of  the  stale  conception  of  life  said  to 
savage;  Reflect,  bethink  yourself  ! The  life  of  your  in 
viduality  cannot  be  true  life,  because  that  life  is  pitiful  and 
passing.  But  the  life  of  a society  and  succession  of  indi- 
viduals, family,  clan,  tribe,  or  state,  goes  on  living,  and 
therefore  a man  must  sacrifice  his  own  individuality  for  the 
life  of  the  family  or  the  state.  In  exactly  the  same  way  the 
Christian  doctrine  says  to  the  man  of  the  social,  state  con- 
ception of  life.  Repent  ye — }.iEravo2,£T£ — i.  c.,  bethink  your- 
self, or  you  will  be  ruined.  Understand  that  this  casual, 
personal  life  which  now  comes  into  being  and  to-morrow  is 
no  more  can  have  no  permanence,  that  no  external  means, 
no  construction  of  it  can  give  it  consecutiveness  and  per- 
manence. Take  thought  and  understand  that  the  life  you 
are  living  is  not  real  life — the  life  of  the  famil}’’,  of  society, 
of  the  state  will  not  save  you  from  annihilation.  The  true, 
the  rational  life  is  only  possible  for  man  according  to  the 
measure  in  which  he  can  participate,  not  in  the  family  or 
the  state,  but  in  the  source  of  life — the  Father  ; according 
to  the  measure  in  which  he  can  merge  his  life  in  the  life  of 


the  Father.  Such  is  undoubtedly  the  Christian  conception 


of  life,  visible  in  every  utterance  of  the  Gospel. 


One  may  not  share  this  view  of  life,  one  may  reject  it, 
one  may  show  its  inaccuracy  and  its  erroneousness,  but  we 
cannot  judge  of  the  Christian  teaching  without  mastering 
this  view  of  life.  Still  less  can  one  criticise  a subject  on  a 
higher  plane  from  a lower  point  of  view.  From  the  base- 
ment one  cannot  judge  of  the  effect  of  the  spire.  But  this 
is  just  what  the  learned  critics  of  the  day  try  to  do.  For 


96 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


they  share  the  erroneous  idea  of  the  orthodox  believers 
that  they  are  in  possession  of  certain  infallible  means  for 
investigating  a subject.  They  fancy  if  they  apply  their 
so-called  scientific  methods  of  criticism,  there  can  be  no 
doubt  of  their  conclusion  being  correct. 

This  testing  the  subject  by  the  fancied  infallible  method 
of  science  is  the  principal  obstacle  to  understanding  the 
Christian  religion  for  unbelievers,  for  so-called  educated 
people.  From  this  follow  all  the  mistakes  made  by  scientific 
men  about  the  Christian  religion,  and  especially  two  strange 
misconceptions  which,  more  than  everything  else,  hinder 
them  from  a correct  understanding  of  it.  One  of  these 
misconceptions  is  that  the  Christian  moral  teaching  cannot 
be  carried  out,  and  that  therefore  it  has  either  no  force  at 
all — that  is,  it  should  not  be  accepted  as  the  rule  of  con- 
duct— or  it  must  be  transformed,  adapted  to  the  limits 
within  which  its  fulfillment  is  possible  in  our  society. 
Another  misconception  is  that  the  Christian  doctrine  of 
love  of  God,  and  therefore  of  his  service,  is  an  obscure, 
mystic  principle,  which  gives  no  definite  object  for  love, 
and  should  therefore  be  replaced  by  the  more  exact  and 
comprehensible  principles  of  love  for  men  and  the  service 
of  humanity. 

The  first  misconception  in  regard  to  the  impossibility  of 
following  the  principle  is  the  result  of  men  of  the  state  con- 
ception of  life  unconsciously  taking  that  conception  as  the 
standard  by  which  the  Christian  religion  directs  men,  and 
taking  the  Christian  principle  of  perfection  as  the  rule  by 
which  that  life  is  to  be  ordered  ; they  think  and  say  that  to 
follow  Christ’s  teaching  is  impossible,  because  the  complete 
fulfilment  of  all  that  is  required  by  this  teaching  would  put 
an  end  to  life.  “ If  a man  were  to  carry  out  all  that  Christ 
teaches,  he  would  destroy  his  own  life  ; and  if  all  men 
carried  it  out,  then  the  human  race  would  come  to  an  end,” 
they  say. 


TS  WITHIN  YOU." 


97 


If  we  take  no  thought  for  the  morrow,  what  we  shall  - 
eat  and  what  we  shall  drink,  and  wherewithal  we  shall  be 
clothed,  do  not  defend  our  life,  nor  resist  evil  by  force,  lay  - 
down  our  life  for  others,  and  observe  perfect  chastity,  the 
human  race  cannot  exist  yjthey  say. 

And  they  are  Berfectly  right  if  they  take  the  principle  of 
perfection  given  ^ Christ’s  teaching  as  a rule  which  every- 
one is  bound  to  fulfill,  just  as  in  the  state  principles  of  life 
everyone  is  bound  to  carry  out  the  rule  of  paying  taxes, 
supporting  the  law,  and  so  on. 

The  misconception  is  based  precisely  on  the  fact  that 
the  teaching  of  Christ  guides  men  differently  from  the  way 
in  which  the  precepts  founded  on  the  lower  conception  of 
life  guide  men.  The  precepts  of  the  state  conception  of 
life  only  guide  men  by  requiring  of  them  an  exact  fulfill- 
ment of  rules  or  laws,  [^hrist’s  teaching  guides  men  by 
pointing  them  to  the  infinite  perfection  of  their  heavenly  v 
Father,  to  which  every  man  independently  and  voluntarily 
struggles,  whatever  the  degree  of  his  imperfection  in  the 
presentTT 

The  misunderstanding  of  men  who  judge  of  the  Christian 
principle  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  state  principle,  con- 
sists in  the  fact  that  on  the  supposition  that  the  perfection 
which  Christ  points  to,  can  be  fully  attained,  they  ask 
themselves  (just  as  they  ask  the  same  question  on  the  sup- 
position that  state  laws  will  be  carried  out)  what  will  be 
the  result  of  all  this  being  carried  out  ? 'This  supposition  ^ 
cannot  be  made,  because  the  perfection  h^d  up  to  Chris- 
tians is  infinite  and  can  never  be  attained  ; and  Christ  lays 
down  his  principle,  having  in  view  the  fact  that  absolute 
perfection  can  never  be  attained,  but  that  striving  toward 
absolute,  infinite  perfection  will  continually  increase  the 
blessedness  of  men,  and  that  this  blessedness  may  be 
increased  to  infinity  thereby. 

Christ  is  teaching  not  ang'els,  but  men,  living  and  moving 


98 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  COD 


ill  the  animal  life.  And  so  to  this  animal  force  of  move- 
ment Christ,  as  it  were,  applies  the  new  force — the  recog- 
nition of  Divine  perfection — and  thereby  directs  the  move- 
ment by  the  resultant  of  these  two  forces. 

To  suppose  that  human  life  is  going  in  the  direction  to 
which  Christ  pointed  it,  is  just  like  supposing  that  a little 
boat  afloat  on  a rapid  river,  and  directing  its  course  almost 
exactly  against  the  current,  will  progress  in  that  direction. 

Christ  recognizes  the  existence  of  both  sides  of  the 
parallelogram,  of  both  eternal  indestructible  forces  of 
which  the  life  of  man  is  compounded  ; the  force  of  his 
animal  nature  and  the  force  of  the  consciousness  of  kin- 
ship to  God.  Saying  nothing  of  the  animal  force  which 
asserts  itself,  remains  always  the  same,  and  is  therefore 
independent  of  human  will,  Christ  speaks  only  of  the 
Divine  force,  calling  upon  a man  to  know  it  more  closely, 
to  set  it  more  free  from  all  that  retards  it,  and  to  carry  it 
to  a higher  degree  of  intensity. 

In  the  process  of  liberating,  of  strengthening  this  force, 
the  true  life  of  man,  according  to  Christ’s  teaching,  con- 
sists, The  true  life,  according  to  preceding  religions, 
consists  in  carrying  out  rules,  the  law  ; according  to 
Christ’s  teaching  it  consists  in  an  ever  closer  approxima- 
tion to  the  divine  perfection  held  up  before  every  man,  and 
recognized  within  himself  by  every  man,  in  an  ever  closer 
and  closer  approach  to  the  perfect  fusion  of  his  will  in  the 
will  of  God,  that  fusion  toward  which  man  strives,  and  the 
attainment  of  which  would  be  the  destruction  of  the  life  we 
know. 

The  divine  perfection  is  the  asymptote  of  human  life  to 
which  it  is  always  striving,  and  always  approaching,  though 
it  can  only  be  reached  in  infinity. 

The  Christian  religion  seems  to  exclude  the  possibility  of 
life  only  when  men  mistake  the  pointing  to  an  ideal  as  the 
laying  down  of  a rule.  It  is  only  then  that  the  principles 


75  WITHIN  YOU: 


99 


presented  in  Christ’s  teaching  appear  to  be  destructive  of  ; 
life.  These  principles,  on  the  contrary,  are  the  only  ones  •• 
that  make  true  life  possible.  Without  these  principles  true  J 
life  could  not  be  possible. 

“ One  ought  not  to  expect  so  much,”  is  what  people 
usually  say  in  discussing  the  requirements  of  the  Christian 
religion.  “ One  cannot  expect  to  take  absolutely  no 
thought  for  the  morrow,  as  is  said  in  the  Gospel,  but 
only  not  to  take  too  much  thought  for  it  ; one  cannot  give 
away  all  to  the  poor,  but  one  must  give  away  a certain 
definite  part ; one  need  not  aim  at  virginity,  but  one  must 
avoid  debauchery  ; one  need  not  forsake  wife  and  children, 
but  one  must  not  give  too  great  a place  to  them  in  one’s 
heart,”  and  so  on. 

But  to  speak  like  this  is  just  like  telling  a man  who  is 
struggling  on  a swift  river  and  is  directing  his  course 
against  the  current,  that  it  is  impossible  to  cross  the  river 
rowing  against  the  current,  and  that  to  cross  it  he  must 
float  in  the  direction  of  the  point  he  wants  to  reach. 

In  reality,  in  order  to  reach  the  place  to  which  he  wants 
to  go,  he  must  row  with  all  his  strength  toward  a point 
much  higher  up. 

To  let  go  the  requirements  of  the  ideal  means  not  only 
to  diminish  the  possibility  of  perfection,  but  to  make  an 
end  of  the  ideal  itself.  Xhe  ideal  that  has  power  over  men 
is  not  an  ideal  invented  by  someone,  but  the  ideal  that 
every  man  carries  within  his  soul.  Only  this  ideal  of  com- 
plete infinite  perfection  has  power  over  men,  and  stimulates 
them  to  action.  A moderate  perfection  loses  its  power  of 
influencing  men’s  hearts.  , 

Christ’s  teaching  only  has  power  when  it  demands  abso- 
lute perfection — that  is,  the  fusion  of  the  divine  nature 
which  exists  in  every  man’s  soul  with  the  will  of  God — the 
union  of  the  Son  with  the  Father.  Life  according  to 
Christ’s  teaching  consists  of  nothing  but  this  setting  free 


lOO 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


of  the  Son  of  God,  existing  in  every  man,  from  the  animal, 
and  in  bringing  him  closer  to  the  Father. 

The  animal  existence  of  a man  does  not  constitute 
human  life  alone.  Life,  according  to  the  will  of  God  only, 
is  also  not  human  life.  Human  life  is  a combination  of  the 
animal  life  and  the  divine  life.  And  the  more  this  com- 
bination approaches  to  the  divine  life,  the  more  life  there 
is  in  it. 

Life,  according  to  the  Christian  religion,  is  a progress 
toward  the  divine  perfection.  No  one  condition,  accord- 
ing to  this  doctrine,  can  be  higher  or  lower  than  another. 
Every  condition,  according  to  this  doctrine,  is  only  a par- 
ticular stage,  of  no  consequence  in  itself,  on  the  way  toward 
unattainable  perfection,  and  therefore  in  itself  it  does  not 
imply  a greater  or  lesser  degree  of  life.  Increase  of  life, 
according  to  this,  consists  in  nothing  but  the  quickening  of 
the  progress  toward  perfection.  And  therefore  the  prog- 
ress toward  perfection  of  the  publican  Zaccheus,  of  the 
woman  that  was  a sinner,  and  of  the  robber  on  the  cross, 
implies  a higher  degree  of  life  than  the  stagnant  righteous- 
ness of  the  Pharisee.  And  therefore  for  this  religion  there 
cannot  be  rules  which  it  is  obligatory  to  obey.  The  man 
who  is  at  a lower  level  but  is  moving  onward  toward  per- 
fection is  living  a more  moral,  a better  life,  is  more  fully 
carrying  out  Christ’s  teaching,  than  the  man  on  a much 
higher  level  of  morality  who  is  not  moving  onward  toward 
perfection. 

It  is  in  this  sense  that  the  lost  sheep  is  dearer  to  the 
Father  than  those  that  were  not  lost.  The  prodigal  son, 
the  piece  of  money  lost  and  found  again,  were  more 
precious  than  those  that  were  not  lost. 

The  fulfillment  of  Christ’s  teaching  consists  in  moving 
away  from  self  toward  God.  It  is  obvious  that  there  can- 
not be  definite  laws  and  rules  for  this  fulfillment  of  the 
teaching.  Every  degree  of  perfection  and  every  degree  of 


75  WITHIN  YOU." 


lOI 


imperfection  are  equal  in  it ; no  obedience  to  laws  consti- 
tutes a fulfillment  of  this  doctrine,  and  therefore  for  it  there 
can  be  no  binding  rules  and  laws. 

From  this  fundamental  distinction  between  the  religion 
of  Christ  and  all  preceding  religions  based  on  the  state 
conception  of  life,  follows  a corresponding  difference  in  the 
special  precepts  of  the  state  theory  and  the  Christian  pre- 
cepts. The  precepts  of  the  state  theory  of  life  insist  for 
the  most  part  on  certain  practical  prescribed  acts,  by  which 
men  are  justified  and  secure  of  being  right.  The  Christian 
precepts  (the  commandment  of  love  is  not  a precept  in  the 
strict  sense  of  the  word,  but  the  e.xpression  of  the  very 
essence  of  the  religion)  are  the  five  commandments  of  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount — all  negative  in  character.  They 
show  only  what  at  a certain  stage  of  development  of 
humanity  men  may  not  do. 

These  commandments  are,  as  it  were,  signposts  on  the 
endless  road  to  perfection,  toward  which  humanity  is  mov- 
ing, showing  the  point  of  perfection  which  is  possible  at  a 
certain  period  in  the  development  of  humanity. 

Christ  has  given  expression  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount 
to  the  eternal  ideal  toward  which  men  are  spontaneously 
struggling,  and  also  the  degree  of  attainment  of  it  to  which 
men  may  reach  in  our  times. 

[Tile  ideal  is  not  to  desire  to  do  ill  to  anyone,  not  to  pro- 
voke ill  will,  to  love  all  men.  The  precept,  showing  the 
level  below  which  we  cannot  fall  in  the  attainment  of  this 
ideal,  is  the  prohibition  of  evil  speaking.  And  that  is  the 
first  command. 

The  ideal  is  perfect  chastit}'',  even  in  thought.  > The  pre- 
cept, showing  the  level  below  which  we  cannot  fall  in  the 
attainment  of  this  ideal,  is  that  of  purity  of  married  life, 
avoidance  of  debauchery.  That  is  the  second  command. 

The  ideal  is  to  take  no  thought  for  the  future,  to  live  in 
the  present  moment.  The  precept,  showing  the  level  below 


102 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


which  we  cannot  fall,  is  the  prohibition  of  swearing,  of 
promising  anything  in  the  future.  And  that  is  the  third 
command. 

The  ideal  is  never  for  any  purpose  to  use  force.  The 
precept,  showing  the  level  below  which  we  cannot  fall  is 
that  of  returning  good  for  evil,  being  patient  under  wrong, 
giving  the  cloak  also.  That  is  the  fourth  command. 

The  ideal  is  to  love  the  enemies  who  hate  us.  The  pre- 
cept, showing  the  level  below  which  we  cannot  fall,  is  not 
to  do  evil  to  our  enemies,  to  speak  well  of  them,  and  to 
make  no  difference  between  them  and  our  neighborsrj 

All  these  precepts  are  indicationsof  what,  on  our  journey 
to  perfection,  we  are  already  fully  able  to  avoid,  and  what 
we  must  labor  to  attain  now,  and  what  we  ought  by  degrees 
to  translate  into  instinctive  and  unconscious  habits.  But 
these  precepts,  far  from  constituting  the  whole  of  Christ’s 
teaching  and  exhausting  it,  are  simply  stages  on  the  way  to 
perfection.  These  precepts  must  and  will  be  followed  by 
higher  and  higher  precepts  on  the  way  to  the  perfection 
held  up  by  the  religion. 

And  therefore  it  is  essentially  a part  of  the  Christian 
religion  to  make  demands  higher  than  those  expressed  in 
its  precepts  ; and  by  no  means  to  diminish  the  demands 
either  of  the  ideal  itself,  or  of  the  precepts,  as  people 
imagine  who  judge  it  from  the  standpoint  of  the  social  con- 
ception of  life. 

So  much  for  one  misunderstanding  of  the  scientific  men, 
in  relation  to  the  import  and  aim  of  Christ’s  teaching. 
Another  misunderstanding  arising  from  the  same  source 
consists  in  substituting  love  for  men,  the  service  of  human- 
ity, for  the  Christian  principles  of  love  for  God  and  his 
service. 

The  Christian  doctrine  to  love  God  and  serve  him,  and 
only  as  a result  of  that  love  to  love  and  serve  one’s  neigh- 
bor, seems  to  scientific  men  obscure,  mystic,  and  arbitrary. 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


103 


And  they  would  absolutely  exclude  the  obligation  of  love 
and  service  of  God,  holding  that  the  doctrine  of  love  for 
men,  for  humanity  alone,  is  far  more  clear,  tangible,  and 
reasonable. 

Scientific  men  teach  in  theory  that  the  only  good  and 
rational  life  is  that  which  is  devoted  to  the  service  of  the 
whole  of  humanity.  That  is  for  them  the  import  of  the 
Christian  doctrine,  and  to  that  they  reduce  Christ’s  teach- 
ing. They  seek  confirmation  of  their  own  doctrine  in  the 
Gospel,  on  the  supposition  that  the  two  doctrines  are  really 
the  same. 

This  idea  is  an  absolutely  mistaken  one.  The  Christian 
doctrine  has  nothing  in  common  with  the  doctrine  of  the 
Positivists,  Communists,  and  all  the  apostles  of  the  univer- 
sal  brotherhood  of  mankind,  based  on  the  general  advantage 
of  such  a brotherhood.  They  differ  from  one  another  espe- 
cially in  Christianity’s  having  a firm  and  clear  basis  in  the 
human  soul,  while  love  for  humanity  is  only  a theoretical 
deduction  from  analogy. 

The  doctrine  of  love  for  humanity  alone  is  based  on  the 
social  conception  of  life. 


The  essence  of  the  social  conception  of  life  consists  in 
the  transference  of  the  aim  of  the  individual  life  to  the  life 
of  societies  of  individuals  : family,  clan,  tribe,  or  state. 
This  transference  is  accomplished  easily  and  naturally  in 
its  earliest  forms,  in  the  transference  of  the  aim  of  life  from 
the  individual  to  the  family  and  the  clan.  The  transference 
to  the  tribe  or  the  nation  is  more  difficult  and  requires 
special  training.  And  the  transference  of  the  sentiment 
to  the  state  is  the  furthest  limit  which  the  process  can 
reach. 

To  love  one’s  self  is  natural  to  everyone,  and  no  one  needs 
any  encouragement  to  do  so.  To  love  one’s  clan  who  sup- 
port and  protect  one,  to  love  one’s  wife,  the  joy  and  help  of 
one’s  existence,  one’s  children,  the  hope  and  consolation  of 


104 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  COD 


one’s  life,  and  one’s  parents,  who  have  given  one  life  and 
education,  is  natural.  And  such  love,  though  far  from 
being  so  strong  as  love  of  self,  is  met  with  pretty  often. 

To  love— for  one’s  own  sake,  through  personal  pride — 
one’s  tribe,  one’s  nation,  though  not  so  natural,  is  neverthe- 
less  common.  Love  of  one’s  own  people  who  are  of  the 
same  blood,  the  same  tongue,  and  the  same  religion  as  one’s 
self  is  possible,  though  far  from  being  so  strong  as  love  of 
self,  or  even  love  of  family  or  clan.  But  love  for  a state, 
such  as  Turkey,  Germany,  England,  Austria,  or  Russia  is  a 
thing  almost  impossible.  And  though  it  is  zealously  in- 
culated,  it  is  only  an  imagined  sentiment ; it  has  no  exist- 
ence in  reality.  And  at  that  limit  man’s  power  of  trans- 
ferring his  interest  ceases,  and  he  cannot  feel  any  direct 
sentiment  for  that  fictitious  entity.  The  Positivist.s,  how- 
ever, and  all  the  apostles  of  fraternity  on  scientific  principles, 
without  taking  into  consideration  the  weakening  of  senti- 
ment in  proportion  to  the  extension  of  its  object,  draw 
further  deductions  in  theory  in  the  same  direction.  “ Since,” 
they  say,  “ it  was  for  the  advantage  of  the  individual  to 
extend  his  personal  interest  to  the  family,  the  tribe,  and  sub- 
sequently to  the  nation  and  the  state,  it  would  be  still  more 
advantageous  to  extend  his  interest  in  societies  of  men  to 
the  whole  of  mankind,  and  so  all  to  live  for  humanity  just 
as  men  live  for  the  family  or  the  state.” 

Theoretically  it  follows,  indeed,  having  extended  the 
love  and  interest  for  the  personality  to  the  family,  the  tribe, 
and  thence  to  the  nation  and  the  state,  it  would  be  perfectly 
logical  for  men  to  save  themselves  the  strife  and  calami- 
ties which  result  from  the  division  of  mankind  into  nations 
and  states  by  extending  their  love  to  the  whole  of  human- 
ity. This  would  be  most  logical,  and  theoretically  nothing 
would  appear  more  natural  to  its  advocates,  who  do  not 
observe  that  love  is  a sentiment  which  may  or  may  not  be 
felt,  but  which  it  is  useless  to  advocate ; and  moreover, 


IS  WITHIN-  YOU."  t05 

that  love  must  have  an  object,  and  that  humanity  is  not  an 
object.  It  is  nothing  but  a fiction. 

The  family,  the  tribe,  even  the  state  were  not  invented 
by  men,  but  formed  themselves  spontaneously,  like  ant- 
hills  or  swarms  of  bees,  and  have  a real  existence.  The 
man  who,  for  the  sake  of  his  own  animal  personality,  loves 
his  family,  knows  whom  he  loves  : Anna,  Dolly,  John, 
Peter,  and  so  on.  The  man  who  loves  his  tribe  and  lakes 
pride  in  it,  knows  that  he  loves  all  the  Guelphs  or  all  the 
Ghibellines  ; the  man  who  loves  the  state  knows  that  he 
loves  France  bounded  by  the  Rhine,  and  the  Pyrenees,  and 
its  principal  city  Paris,  and  its  history  and  so  on.  But  the 
man  who  loves  humanity — what  does  he  love?  There  is 
such  a thing  as  a state,  as  a nation  ; there  is  the  abstract 
conception  of  man  ; but  humanity  as  a concrete  idea  does 
not,  and  cannot  exist. 

Humanity!  Where  is  the  definition  of  humanity? 
Where  does  it  end  and  where  does  it  begin  ? Does  human- 
ity end  with  the  savage,  the  idiot,  the  dipsomaniac,  or  the 
madman  ? If  we  draw  a line  excluding  from  humanity  its 
lowest  representatives,  where  are  we  to  draw  the  line? 
Shall  we  exclude  the  negroes  like  the  Americans,  or  the 
Hindoos  like  some  Englishmen,  or  the  Jews  like  some 
others?  If  we  include  all  men  without  exception,  why 
should  we  not  include  also  the  higher  animals,  many  of 
whom  are  superior  to  the  lowest  specimens  of  the  human 
race. 

We  know  nothing  of  humanity  as  an  eternal  object,  and 
we  know  nothing  of  its  limits.  Humanity  is  a fiction,  and 
it  is  impossible  to  love  it.  It  would,  doubtless,  be  very 
advantageous  if  men  could  love  humanity  just  as  they  love 
their  family.  It  would  be  very  advantageous,  as  Commun- 
ists advocate,  to  replace  the  competitive,  individualistic 
organization  of  men’s  activity  by  a social  universal  organi- 
zation, so  that  each  would  be  for  all  and  all  for  each. 


Io6  “ the  kingdom  of  GOD 

Only  there  are  no  motives  to  lead  men  to  do  this.  The 
Positivists,  the  Communists,  and  all  the  apostles  of  frater- 
nity on  scientific  principles  advocate  the  extension  to  the 
whole  of  humanity  of  the  love  men  feel  for  themselves, 
their  families,  and  the  state.  They  forget  that  the  love 
which  they  are  discussing  is  a personal  love,  which  might 
expand  in  a rarefied  form  to  embrace  a man’s  native 
country,  but  which  disappears  before  it  can  embrace  an 
artificial  state  such  as  Austria,  England,  or  Turkey,  and 
which  we  cannot  even  conceive  of  in  relation  to  all  human- 
ity, an  absolutely  mystic  conception. 

“ A man  loves  himself  (his  animal  personality),  he  loves 
his  family,  he  even  loves  his  native  country.  Why  should 
he  not  love  humanity  .?  That  would  be  such  an  excellent 
thing.  And  by  the  way,  it  is  precisely  what  is  taught  by 
Christianity.”  So  think  the  advocates  of  Positivist,  Com- 
monistic,  or  Socialistic  fraternity. 

It  would  indeed  be  an  excellent  thing.  But  it  can  never 
be,  for  the  love  that  is  based  on  a personal  or  social  con- 
ception of  life  can  never  rise  beyond  love  for  the  slate. 

The  fallacy  of  the  argument  lies  in  the  fact  that  the 
social  conception  of  life,  on  which  love  for  family  and 
nation  is  founded,  rests  itself  on  love  of  self,  and  that  love 
grows  weaker  and  weaker  as  it  is  extended  from  self  to 
family,  tribe,  nationality,  and  state  ; and  in  the  state  we 
reach  the  furthest  limit  beyond  which  it  cannot  go. 

The  necessity  of  extending  the  sphere  of  love  is  beyond 
dispute.  But  in  reality  the  possibility  of  this  love  is  de- 
stroyed by  the  necessity  of  extending  its  object  indefinitely. 
And  thus  the  insufficiency  of  personal  human  love  is  made 
manifest. 

And  here  the  advocates  of  Positivist,  Communistic, 
Socialistic  fraternity  propose  to  draw  upon  Christian  love 
to  make  up  the  default  of  this  bankrupt  human  love  ; but 
Christian  love  only  in  its  results,  not  in  its  foundations. 


IS  WITHIN  YOU."  107 

They  propose  love  for  humanity  alone,  apart  from  love  for 
God. 

But  such  a love  cannot  exist.  There  is  no  motive  to 
produce  it.  Christian  love  is  the  result  only  of  the  Chris- 
tian conception  of  life,  in  which  the  aim  of  life  is  to  love 
and  serve  God. 

The  social  conception  of  life  has  led  men,  by  a natural 
transition  from  love  of  self  and  then  of  family,  tribe,  nation, 
and  state,  to  a consciousness  of  the  necessity  of  love  for 
humanity,  a conception  which  has  no  definite  limits  and 
extends  to  all  living  things.  And  this  necessity  for  love 
of  what  awakens  no  kind  of  sentiment  in  a man  is  a con- 
tradiction which  cannot  be  solved  by  the  social  theory  of 
life. 

The  Christian  doctrine  in  its  full  significance  can  alone 
solve  it,  by  giving  a new  meaning  to  life.  Christianity 
recognizes  love  of  self,  of  family,  of  nation,  and  of  humanity, 
and  not  only  of  humanity,  but  of  everything  living,  every- 
thing existing  ; it  recognizes  the  necessity  of  an  infinite 
extension  of  the  sphere  of  love.  But  the  object  of  this 
love  is  not  found  outside  self  in  societies  of  individuals, 
nor  in  the  external  world,  but  within  self,  in  the  divine 
self  whose  essence  is  that  very  love,  which  the  animal  self 
is  brought  to  feel  the  need  of  through  its  consciousness  of 
its  own  perishable  nature. 

The  difference  between  the  Christian  doctrine  and  those 
which  preceded  it  is  that  the  social  doctrine  said  : “ Live  in 
opposition  to  your  nature  [understanding  by  this  only  the 
animal  nature],  make  it  subject  to  the  external  law  of 
family,  society,  and  state.”  Christianity  says  : “ Live 
according  to  your  nature  [understanding  by  this  the  divine 
nature]  ; do  not  make  it  subject  to  anything — neither  you 
(an  animal  self)  nor  that  of  others — and  you  will  attain  the 
very  aim  to  which  you  are  striving  when  you  subject  your 
external  self.” 


io8 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


The  Christian  doctrine  brings  a man  to  the  elementary 
consciousness  of  self,  only  not  of  the  animal  self,  but  of 
the  divine  self,  the  divine  spark,  the  self  as  the  Son  of  God, 
as  much  God  as  the  Father  himself,  though  confined  in  an 
animal  husk.  The  consciousness  of  being  the  Son  of  God, 
whose  chief  characteristic  is  love,  satisfies  the  need  for  the 
extension  of  the  sphere  of  love  to  which  tlie  man  of  the 
social  conception  of  life  had  been  brought.  For  the  latter, 
the  welfare  of  the  personality  demanded  an  ever-widening 
extension  of  the  sphere  of  love  ; love  was  a necessity  and 
was  confined  to  certain  objects — self,  famil}’’,  societ}-.  With 
the  Christian  conception  of  life,  love  is  not  a necessity  and 
is  confined  to  no  object  ; it  is  the  essential  faculty  of  the 
human  soul.  \Man  loves  not  because  it  is  his  interest  to 
love  this  or  that,  but  because  love  is  the  essence  of  his  soul, 
because  he  cannot  but  love. 

The  Christian  doctrine  shows  man  that  the  essence  of 
his  soul  is  love — that  his  happiness  depends  not  on  loving 
this  or  that  object,  but  on  loving  the  principle  of  the  whole 
— God,  whom  he  recognizes  within  himself  as  love,  and 
therefore  he  loves  all  things  and  all  mej^ 

In  this  is  the  fundamental  difference  between  the  Chris- 
tian doctrine  and  the  doctrine  of  the  Positivists,  and  all 
the  theorizers  about  universal  brotherhood  on  non-christian 
principles. 

Such  are  the  two  principal  misunderstandings  relating  to 
the  Christian  religion,  from  which  the  greater  number  of 
false  reasonings  about  it  proceed.  The  first  consists  in 
the  belief  that  Christ’s  teaching  instructs  men,  like  all  pre- 
vious religions,  by  rules,  which  they  are  bound  to  follow, 
and  that  these  rules  cannot  be  fulfilled.  The  second  is  the 
idea  that  the  whole  purport  of  Christianity  is  to  teach  men 
to  live  advantageously  together,  as  one  family,  and  that  to 
attain  this  we  need  only  follow  the  rule  of  love  to  humanity, 
dismissing  all  thought  of  love  of  God  altogether. 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


109 

The  mistaken  notion  of  scientific  men  that  the  essence 
of  Christianity  consists  in  the  supernatural,  and  that  its 
moral  teaching  is  impracticable,  constitutes  another  reason 
of  the  failure  of  men  of  the  present  day  to  understand 
Christianity. 


CHAPTER  V. 

CONTRADICTION  BETWEEN  OUR  LIFE  AND  OUR  CHRISTIAN 
CONSCIENCE. 

Men  Think  they  can  Accept  Christianity  without  Altering  th.eir  Life — 
Pagan  Conception  of  Life  does  not  Correspond  with  Present  Stage  of 
Development  of  Humanity,  and  Christian  Conception  Alone  Can  Accord 
with  it — Christian  Conception  of  Life  not  yet  Understood  by  Men,  but 
the  Progress  of  Life  itself  will’ Lead  them  Inevitably  to  Adopt  it — The 
Requirements  of  a New  Theory  of  Life  Always  Seem  Incomprehensible, 
Mystic,  and  Supernatural — So  Seem  the  Requirements  of  the  Christian 
Theory  of  Life  to  the  Majority  of  Men — The  Absorption  of  the  Christian 
Conception  of  Life  will  Inevitably  be  Brought  About  as  the  Result  of 
Material  and  Spiritual  Causes — The  Fact  of  Men  Knowing  the  Require- 
ments of  the  Higher  View  of  Life,  and  yet  Continuing  to  Preserve 
Inferior  Organizations  of  Life,  Leads  to  Contradictions  and  Sufferings 
which  Embitter  Existence  and  Must  Result  in  its  Transformation — The 
Contradictions  of  our  Life — The  Economic  Contradiction  and  the 
Suffering  Induced  by  it  for  Rich  and  Poor  Alike — The  Political  Con- 
tradiction and  the  Sufferings  Induced  by  Obedience  to  the  Laws  cf  the 
State — The  International  Contradiction  and  the  Recognition  of  it  by 
Contemporaries:  Komarovsky,  Ferri,  Booth,  Passy,  Lawson,  Wilson, 
Bartlett,  Defourney,  Moneta — The  Striking  Character  of  the  Military 
Contradiction. 

There  are  many  reasons  why  Christ’s  teaching  is  not 
understood.  One  reason  is  that  people  suppose  they  have 
understood  it  when  they  have  decided,  as  the  Churchmen 
do,  that  it  was  revealed  by  supernatural  means,  or  when 
they  have  studied,  as  the  scientific  men  do,  the  external 
forms  in  which  it  has  been  manifested.  Another  reason  is 


1 lO 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


the  mistaken  notion  that  it  is  impracticable,  and  ought  to 
be  replaced  by  the  doctrine  of  love  for  humanity.  But  the 
principal  reason,  which  is  the  source  of  all  the  other  mis- 
taken ideas  about  it,  is  the  notion  that  Christianity  is  a doc- 
trine which  can  be  accepted  or  rejected  without  any  change 
of  life. 

Men  who  are  used  to  the  existing  order  of  things,  who 
like  it  and  dread  its  being  changed,  try  to  take  the  doc- 
trine as  a collection  of  revelations  and  rules  which  one  can 
accept  without  their  modifying  one’s  life.  While  Christ’s 
teaching  is  not  only  a doctrine  which  gives  rules  which  a 
man  must  follow,  it  unfolds  a new  meaning  in  life,  and 
defines  a whole  world  of  human  activity  quite  different 
from  all  that  has  preceded  it  and  appropriate  to  the  period 
on  which  man  is  entering. 

The  life  of  humanity  changes  and  advances,  like  the  life 
of  the  individual,  by  stages,  and  every  stage  has  a theory 
of  life  appropriate  to  it,  which  is  inevitably  absorbed  by 
men.  Those  who  do  not  absorb  it  consciously,  absorb  it 
unconsciously.  It  is  the  same  with  the  changes  in  the 
beliefs  of  peoples  and  of  all  humanity  as  it  is  with  the 
changes  of  belief  of  individuals.  If  the  father  of  a family 
continues  to  be  guided  in  his  conduct  by  his  childish  con- 
ceptions of  life,  life  becomes  so  difficult  for  him  that  he 
involuntarily  seeks  another  philosophy  and  readily  absorbs 
that  which  is  appropriate  to  his  age. 

That  is  just  what  is  happening  now  to  humanity  at  this 
time  of  transition  through  which  we  are  passing,  from  the 
pagan  conception  of  life  to  the  Christian.  The  socialized 
man  of  the  present  day  is  brought  by  experience  of  life 
itself  to  the  necessity  of  abandoning  the  pagan  conception 
of  life,  which  is  inappropriate  to  the  present  stage  of 
humanity,  and  of  submitting  to  the  obligation  of  the 
Christian  doctrines,  the  truths  of  which,  however  cor- 
rupt and  misinterpreted,  are  still  known  to  him,  and  alone 


is  WITHIN  TOUT  ill 

offer  him  a solution  of  the  contradictions  surrounding 
him. 

If  the  requirements  of  the  Christian  doctrine  seem 
strange  and  even  alarming  to  the  man  of  the  social  theory 
of  life,  no  less  strange,  incomprehensible,  and  alarming  to 
the  savage  of  ancient  times  seemed  the  requirements  of  the 
social  doctrine  when  it  was  not  fully  understood  and  could 
not  be  foreseen  in  its  results. 

“ It  is  unreasonable,”  said  the  savage,  “ to  sacrifice  my 
peace  of  mind  or  my  life  in  defense  of  something  incom- 
prehensible, impalpable,  and  conventional — family,  tribe,  or 
nation  ; and  above  all  it  is  unsafe  to  put  oneself  at  the  dis- 
posal of  the  power  of  others.” 

But  the  time  came  when  the  savage,  on  one  hand,  felt, 
though  vaguely,  the  value  of  the  social  conception  of  life, 
and  of  its  chief  motor  power,  social  censure,  or  social 
approbation — glory,  and  when,  on  the  other  hand,  the  diffi- 
culties of  his  personal  life  became  so  great  that  he  could 
not  continue  to  believe  in  the  value  of  his  old  theory  of  life. 
Then  he  accepted  the  social,  state  theory  of  life  and  sub- 
mitted to  it. 

That  is  just  what  the  man  of  the  social  theory  of  life  is 
passing  through  now. 

“ It  is  unreasonable,”  says  the  socialized  man,  “ to  sacri- 
fice my  welfare  and  that  of  my  family  and  my  country  in 
order  to  fulfill  some  higher  law,  which  requires  me  to  re- 
nounce  my  most  natural  and  virtuous  feelings  of  love  of 
self,  of  family,  of  kindred,  and  of  country  ; and  above  all, 
it  is  unsafe  to  part  with  the  security  of  life  afforded  by  the 
organization  of  government.” 

But  the  time  is  coming  when,  on  one  hand,  the  vague 
consciousness  in  his  soul  of  the  higher  law,  of  love  to  God 
and  his  neighbor,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the  suffering, 
resulting  from  the  contradictions  of  life,  will  force  the  man 
to  reject  the  social  theory  and  to  assimilate  the  new  one 


1 12 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OE  GOD 


prepared  ready  for  him,  which  solves  all  the  contradictions 
and  removes  all  his  sufferings — the  Christian  theory  of  life. 
And  this  time  has  now  come. 

We,  who  thousands  of  years  ago  passed  through  the 
transition,  from  the  personal,  animal  view  of  life  to  the 
socialized  view,  imagine  that  that  transition  was  an  inevita- 
ble and  natural  one  ; but  this  transition  through  which  we 
have  been  passing  for  the  last  eighteen  hundred  years 
seems  arbitrary,  unnatural,  and  alarming.  But  we  only 
fancy  this  because  that  first  transition  has  been  so  fully 
completed  that  the  practice  attained  by  it  has  become  un- 
conscious and  instinctive  in  us,  while  the  present  transition 
is  not  yet  over  and  we  have  to  complete  it  consciously. 

It  took  ages,  thousands  of  years,  for  the  social  conception 
of  life  to  permeate  men’s  consciousness.  It  went  through 
various  forms  and  has  now  passed  into  the  region  of  the 
instinctive  through  inheritance,  education,  and  habit.  And 
therefore  it  seems  natural  to  us.  But  five  thousand  years 
ago  it  seemed  as  unnatural  and  alarming  to  men  as  the 
Christian  doctrine  in  its  true  sense  seems  to-day. 

We  think  to-day  that  the  requirements  of  the  Christian 
doctrine — of  universal  brotherhood,  suppression  of  national 
distinctions,  abolition  of  private  property,  and  the  strange 
injunction  of  non-resistance  to  evil  by  force — demand  what 
is  impossible.  But  it  was  just  the  same  thousands  of  years 
ago,  with  every  social  or  even  family  duty,  such  as  the  duty 
of  parents  to  support  their  children,  of  the  young  to  main- 
tain the  old,  of  fidelity  in  marriage.  Still  more  strange,  and 
even  unreasonable,  seemed  the  state  duties  of  submitting  to 
the  appointed  authority,  and  paying  taxes,  and  fighting  in 
defense  of  the  country,  and  so  on.  All  such  requirements 
seem  simple,  comprehensible,  and  natural  to  us  to-da\%  and 
we  see  nothing  mysterious  oralarming  in  them.  But  three 
or  five  thousand  years  ago  they  seemed  to  require  what  was 
impossible. 


/S  WITHIN  YOU." 


”3 


The  social  conception  of  life  served  as  the  basis  of  reli- 
gion because  at  the  time  when  it  was  first  presented  to  men 
it  seemed  to  them  absolutely  incomprehensible,  mystic,  and 
supernatural.  Now  that  we  Iiave  outlived  that  phase  of  the 
life  of  humanity,  we  understand  the  rational  grounds  for 
uniting  men  in  families,  communities,  and  states.  But  in 
antiquity  the  duties  involved  by  such  association  were  pre- 
sented under  cover  of  the  supernatural  and  were  confirmed 
by  it. 

The  patriarchal  religions  exalted  the  family,  the  tribe,  the 
nation.  State  religions  deified  emperors  and  states.  Even 
now  most  ignorant  people — like  our  peasants,  who  call  the 
Tzar  an  earthly  god — obey  state  laws,  not  through  any 
rational  recognition  of  their  necessity,  nor  because  they 
have  any  conception  of  the  meaning  of  state,  but  through  a 
religious  sentiment.  ^ 

In  precisely  the  same  way  the  Christian  doctrine  is  pre- 
sented to  men  of  the  social  or  heathen  theory  of  life  to-day, 
in  the  guise  of  a supernatural  religion,  though  there  is  in 
reality  nothing  mysterious,  mystic,  or  supernatural  about  it. 
It  is  simply  the  theory  of  life  which  is  appropriate  to  the 
Resent  degree  of  material  development,  the  present  stage 
of  growth  of  humanity,  and  which  must  therefore  inevitably 
be  accepted. 

The  time  will  come — it  is  already  coming — when  the 
Christian  principles  of  equality  and  fraternity,  community 
of  property,  non-resistance  of  evil  by  force,  will  appear  just 
as  natural  and  simple  as  the  principles  of  family  or  social 
life  seem  to  us  now. 

Humanity  can  no  more  go  backward  in  its  development 
than  the  individual  man.  Men  have  outlived  the  social, 
family,  and  state  conceptions  of  life.  Now  they  must 
go  forward  and  assimilate  the  next  and  higher  concep- 
tion of  life,  which  is  what  is  now  taking  place.  This 
change  is  brought  about  in  two  ways : consciously 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


I14 

through  spiritual  causes,  and  unconsciously  through  mate- 
rial causes. 

Just  as  the  individual  man  very  rarely  changes  his  way 
of  life  at  the  dictates  of  his  reason  alone,  but  generally 
continues  to  live  as  before,  in  spite  of  the  new  interests  and 
aims  revealed  to  him  by  his  reason,  and  only  alters  his  way 
of  living  when  it  has  become  absolutely  opposed  to  his 
conscience,  and  consequently  intolerable  to  him  ; so,  too, 
humanity,  long  after  it  has  learnt  through  its  religions  the 
new  interests  and  aims  of  life,  toward  which  it  must  strive, 
continues  in  the  majority  of  its  representatives  to  live  as 
before,  and  is  only  brought  to  accept  the  new  conception  by 
finding  it  impossible  to  go  on  living  its  old  life  as  before. 

Though  the  need  of  a change  of  life  is  preached  by  the 
religious  leaders  and  recognized  and  realized  by  the  most 
intelligent  men,  the  majority,  in  spite  of  their  reverential 
attitude  to  their  leaders,  that  is,  their  faith  in  their  teach- 
ing, continue  to  be  guided  by  the  old  theory  of  life  in  their 
present  complex  existence.  As  though  the  father  of  a 
family,  knowing  how  he  ought  to  behave  at  his  age,  should 
yet  continue  through  habit  and  thoughtlessness  to  live  in 
the  same  childish  way  as  he  did  in  boyhood. 

That  is  just  what  is  happening  in  the  transition  of 
humanity  from  one  stage  to  another,  through  which  we  are 
passing  now.  YHumanity  has  outgrown  its  social  stage  and 
Clias  entered  upon  a new  period^  It  recognizes  the  doctrine 
which  ought  to  be  made  the  basis  of  life  in  this  new  period. 
But  through  inertia  it  continues  to  keep  up  the  old  forms 
of  life.  From  this  inconsistency  between  the  new  concep- 
tion of  life  and  practical  life  follows  a whole  succession  of 
contradictions  and  sufferings  which  embitter  our  life  and 
^jiecessitate  its  alteration. 

I One  need  only  compare  the  practice  of  life  with  the 
I theory  of  it,  to  be  dismayed  at  the  glaring  antagonism 
j between  our  conditions  of  life  and  our  conscience, 


75  WITHIN  YOU." 


"5 


Our  whole  life  is  in  flat  contradiction  with  all  we  know, 
and  with  all  we  regard  as  necessary  and  right.  This  con- 
tradiction runs  through  everything,  in  economic  life,  in 
political  life,  and  in  international  life.  As  though  we  had 
forgotten  what  we  knew  and  put  away  for  a time  the 
principles  we  believe  in  (we  cannot  help  still  believing  in 
them  because  they  are  the  only  foundation  we  have  to  base 
our  life  on)  we  do  the  very  opposite  of  all  that  our  con- 
science and  our  common  sense  require  of  us. 

We  are  guided  in  economical,  political,  and  international 
questions  by  the  principles  which  were  appropriate  to  men 
of  three  or  five  thousand  years  ago,  though  they  are  directly 
opposed  to  our  conscience  and  the  conditions  of  life  in 
which  we  are  placed  to-day. 

It  was  very  well  for  the  man  of  ancient  times  to  live  in  a 
society  based  on  the  division  of  mankind  into  masters  and 
slaves,  because  he  believed  that  such  a distinction  was 
decreed  by  God  and  must  always  exist.  But  is  such  a 
belief  possible  in  these  days? 

The  man  of  antiquity  could  believe  he  had  the  right  to 
enjoy  the  good  things  of  this  world  at  the  expense  of  other 
men,  and  to  keep  them  in  misery  for  generations,  since  he 
believed  that  men  came  from  different  origins,  were  base  or 
noble  in  blood,  children  of  Ham  or  of  Japhet.  The  greatest 
sages  of  the  world,  the  teachers  of  humanity,  Plato  and 
Aristotle,  justified  the  existence  of  slaves  and  demonstrated 
the  lawfulness  of  slavery  ; and  even  three  centuries  ago, 
the  men  who  described  an  imaginary  society  of  the  future, 
Utopia,  could  not  conceive  of  it  without  slaves. 

Men  of  ancient  and  medieval  times  believed,  firmly 
believed,  that  men  are  not  equal,  that  the  only  true  men 
are  Persians,  or  Greeks,  or  Romans,  or  Franks.  But  we 
cannot  believe  that  now.  And  people  who  sacrifice  them- 
selves for  the  principles  of  aristocracy  and  of  patriotism 
to-day,  don’t  believe  and  can’t  believe  what  they  assert. 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  COD 


ii6 

Wc  all  know  and  cannot  help  knowing — even  though  we 
may  never  have  heard  the  idea  clearly  expressed,  may  never 
have  read  of  it,  and  may  never  have  put  it  into  words,  still 
through  unconsciously  imbibing  the  Christian  sentiments 
that  are  in  the  air — with  our  whole  heart  we  know  and  can. 
not  escape  knowing  the  fundamental  truth  of  the  Christian 
doctrine,  that  we  are  all  sons  of  one  Father,  wherever  we 
may  live  and  whatever  language  we  may  speak  ; we  are  all 
brothers  and  are  subject  to  the  same  law  of  love  implanted 
by  our  common  Father  in  our  hearts. 

Whatever  the  opinions  and  degree  of  education  of  a man 
of  to-day,  whatever  his  shade  of  liberalism,  whatever  his 
school  of  philosophy,  or  of  science,  or  of  economics, 
however  ignorant  or  superstitious  he  may  be,  every  man 
of  the  present  day  knows  that  all  men  have  an  equal 
right  to  life  and  the  good  things  of  life,  and  that  one  set 
of  people  are  no  better  nor  worse  than  another,  that  all 
are  equal.  Everyone  knows  this,  beyond  doubt  ; every- 
one feels  it  in  his  whole  being.  Yet  at  the  same  time 
everyone  sees  all  round  him  the  division  of  men  into  two 
castes — the  one,  laboring,  oppressed,  poor,  and  suffering, 
the  other  idle,  oppressing,  luxurious,  and  profligate.  And 
everyone  not  only  sees  this,  but  voluntarily  or  involun- 
tarily, in  one  way  or  another,  he  takes  part  in  maintaining 
this  distinction  whicli  his  conscience  condemns.  And  he 
cannot  help  suffering  from  the  consciousness  of  this  con- 
tradiction and  his  share  in  it. 

Whether  he  be  master  or  slave,  the  man  of  to-day  can- 
not  help  constantly  feeling  the  painful  opposition  between 
his  conscience  and  actual  life,  and  the  miseries  resulting 
from  it. 

The  toiling  masses,  the  immense  majority  of  mankind 
who  are  suffering  under  the  incessant,  meaningless,  and 
hopeless  toil  and  privation  in  which  their  whole  life  is 
swallowed  up,  still  find  their  keenest  suffering  in  the  glaring 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


117 

contrast  between  what  is  and  what  ought  to  be,  according 
to  all  the  beliefs  held  by  themselves,  and  those  who  have 
brought  them  to  that  condition  and  keep  them  in  it. 

They  know  that  they  are  in  slavery  and  condemned  to 
privation  and  darkness  to  minister  to  the  lusts  of  the 
minority  who  keep  them  down.  They  know  it,  and  they 
say  so  plainly.  And  this  knowledge  increases  their  suffer- 
ings and  constitutes  its  bitterest  sting. 

The  slave  of  antiquity  knew  that  he  was  a slave  by  nature, 
but  our  laborer,  while  he  feels  he  is  a slave,  knows  that  he 
ought  not  to  be,  and  so  he  tastes  the  agony  of  Tantalus, 
forever  desiring  and  never  gaining  what  might  and  ought 
to  be  his. 

The  sufferings  of  the  working  classes,  springing  from  the 
contradiction  between  what  is  and  what  ought  to  be,  are 
increased  tenfold  by  the  envy  and  hatred  engendered  by 
their  consciousness  of  it. 

The  laborer  of  the  present  day  would  not  cease  to  suffer 
even  if  his  toil  were  much  lighter  than  that  of  the  slave  of 
ancient  times,  even  if  he  gained  an  eight-hour  working 
day  and  a wage  of  three  dollars  a day.  For  he  is  working 
at  the  manufacture  of  things  which  he  will  not  enjoy, 
working  not  by  his  own  will  for  his  own  benefit,  but  through 
necessity,  to  satisfy  the  desires  of  luxurious  and  idle  people 
in  general,  and  for  the  profit  of  a single  rich  man,  the 
owner  of  a factory  or  workshop  in  particular.  And  he 
knows  that  all  this  is  going  on  in  a world  in  which  it  is  a 
recognized  scientific  principle  that  labor  alone  creates 
wealth,  and  that  to  profit  by  the  labor  of  others  is  immoral, 
dishonest,  and  punishable  by  law  ; in  a world,  moreover, 
which  professes  to  believe  Christ’s  doctrine  that  we  are  all 
brothers,  and  that  true  merit  and  dignity  is  to  be  found  in 
serving  one’s  neighbor,  not  in  exploiting  him.  All  this  he 
knows,  and  he  cannot  but  suffer  keenly  from  the  sharp 
contrast  between  what  is  and  what  ought  to  be. 


ii8 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


i i 


“According  to  all  principles,  according  to  all  I know, 
and  what  everyone  professes,”  the  workman  says  to  himself. 
“I  ought  to  be  free,  equal  to  everyone  else,  and  loved; 
and  I am — a slave,  humiliated  and  hated.”  And  he  too  is 
filled  with  hatred  and  tries  to  find  means  to  escape  from 
his  position,  to  shake  off  the  enemy  who  is  over-riding  him, 
and  to  oppress  him  in  turn.  People  say,  “ Workmen  have 
no  business  to  try  to  become  capitalists,  the  poor  to  try  to 
put  themselves  in  the  place  of  the  rich.”  That  is  a mis- 
take. The  workingmen  and  the  poor  would  be  wrong  if 
they  tried  to  do  so  in  a world  in  which  slaves  and  masters 
were  regarded  as  different  species  created  by  God  ; but 
they  are  living  in  a world  which  professes  the  faith  of  the 
Gospel,  that  all  are  alike  sons  of  God,  and  so  brothers  and 
equal.  And  however  men  may  try  to  conceal  it,  one  of 
the  first  conditions  of  Christian  life  is  love,  not  in  words 
but  in  deeds. 

The  man  of  the  so-called  educated  classes  lives  in  still 
more  glaring  inconsistency  and  suffering.  Every  educated 
man,  if  he  believes  in  anything,  believes  in  the  brotherhood 
of  all  men,  or  at  least  he  has  a sentiment  of  humanity,  or 
else  of  justice,  or  else  he  believes  in  sciei;ce.  And  all  the 
while  he  knows  that  his  whole  life  is  framed  on  principles 
in  direct  opposition  to  it  all,  to  all  the  principles  of  Christi- 
anity, humanity,  justice,  and  science. 

Pie  knows  that  all  the  habits  in  which  he  has  been  brought 
up,  and  which  he  could  not  give  up  without  suffering,  can 
only  be  satisfied  through  the  exhausting,  often  fatal,  toil  of 
oppressed  laborers,  that  is,  through  the  most  obvious  and 
brutal  violation  of  the  principles  of  Christianit\%  humanity, 
and  justice,  and  even  of  science  (that  is,  economic  science). 
He  advocates  the  principles  of  fraternity,  humanity,  justice, 
and  science,  and  yet  he  lives  so  that  he  is  dependent  on  the 
oppression  of  the  working  classes,  rvhich  he  denounces,  and 
his  whole  life  is  based  on  the  advantages  gained,  by  theif 


IS  WITIim  YOU." 


119 


oppression.  Moreover  he  is  directing  every  effort  to  main- 
taining this  state  of  things  so  flatly  opposed  to  all  his  beliefs. 

We  are  all  brothers — and  yet  every  morning  a brother  or 
a sister  must  empty  the  bedroom  slops  for  me.  We  are  all 
brothers,  but  every  morning  I must  have  a cigar,  a sweet- 
meat, an  ice,  and  such  things,  which  my  brothers  and  sisters 
have  been  wasting  their  health  in  manufacturing,  and  I en- 
joy these  things  and  demand  them.  We  are  all  brothers, 
yet  I live  by  working  in  a bank,  or  mercantile  house,  or  shop 
at  making  all  goods  dearer  for  my  brothers.  We  are  all 
brothers,  but  I live  on  a salary  paid  me  for  prosecuting, 
judging,  and  condemning  the  thief  or  the  prostitute  whose 
existence  the  whole  tenor  of  my  life  tends  to  bring  about, 
and  who  I know  ought  not  to  be  punished  but  reformed. 
We  are  all  brothers,  but  I live  on  the  salary  I gain  by  col- 
lecting taxes  from  needy  laborers  to  be  spent  on  the  luxur- 
ies of  the  rich  and  idle.  We  are  all  brothers,  but  I take  a 
stipend  for  preaching  a false  Christian  religion,  which  I do 
not  myself  believe  in,  and  which  only  serves  to  hinder  men 
from  understanding  true  Christianity.  I take  a stipend  as 
priest  or  bishop  for  deceiving  men  in  the  matter  of  the 
greatest  importance  to  them.  We  are  all  brothers,  but  I 
will  not  give  the  poor  the  benefit  of  my  educational,  medical, 
or  literary  labors  except  for  money.  We  are  all  brothers, 
yet  I take  a salary  for  being  ready  to  commit  murder,  for 
teaching  men  to  murder,  or  making  firearms,  gunpowder, 
or  fortifications. 

The  whole  life  of  the  upper  classes  is  a constant  incon- 
sistency. The  more  delicate  a man’s  conscience  is,  the 
more  painful  this  contradiction  is  to  him. 

A man  of  sensitive  conscience  cannot  but  suffer  if  he  lives 
such  a life.  The  only  means  by  which  he  can  escape  from 
thissuffering  is  by  blunting  his  conscience,  but  even  if  some 
men  succeed  in  dulling  their  conscience  they  cannot  dull 
their  fears. 


120 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


The  men  of  the  higher  dominating  classes  whose  con- 
science is  naturally  not  sensitive  or  has  become  blunted,  if 
they  don’t  suffer  through  conscience,  suffer  from  fear  and 
hatred.  They  are  bound  to  suffer.  They  know  all  the 
hatred  of  them  existing,  and  inevitably  existing  in  the  work- 
ing classes.  They  are  aware  that  the  working  classes 
know  that  they  are  deceived  and  exploited,  and  that  they 
are  beginning  to  organize  themselves  to  shake  off  oppres- 
sion and  revenge  themselves  on  their  oppressors.  The 
higher  classes  see  the  unions,  the  strikes,  the  May  Day 
Celebrations,  and  feel  the  calamity  that  is  threatening  them, 
and  their  terror  passes  into  an  instinct  of  self-defense  and 
hatred.  They  know  that  if  for  one  instant  they  are  worsted 
in  the  struggle  with  their  oppressed  slaves,  they  will  perish, 
because  the  slaves  are  exasperated  and  their  exasperation 
is  growing  more  intense  with  every  day  of  oppression.  The 
oppressors,  even  if  they  wished  to  do  so,  could  not  make  an 
end  to  oppression.  They  know  that  they  themselves  will 
perish  directly  they  even  relax  the  harshness  of  their 
oppression.  And  they  do  not  relax  it,  in  spite  of  all  their 
pretended  care  for  the  welfare  of  the  working  classes,  for 
the  eight-hour  day,  for  regulation  of  the  labor  of  minors 
and  of  women,  for  savings  banks  and  pensions.  All  that  is 
humbug,  or  else  simply  anxiety  to  keep  the  slave  fit  to  do 
his  work.  But  the  slave  is  still  a slave,  and  the  master  who 
cannot  live  without  a slave  is  less  disposed  to  set  him  free 
than  ever. 

The  attitude  of  the  ruling  classes  to  the  laborers  is  that 
of  a man  who  has  felled  his  adversary  to  the  earth  and 
holds  him  down,  not  so  much  because  he  wants  to  hold  him 
down,  as  because  he  knows  that  if  he  let  him  go,  even 
for  a second,  he  would  himself  be  stabbed,  for  his  adver- 
sary is  infuriated  and  has  a knife  in  his  hand.  And  there- 
fore, whether  their  conscience  is  tender  or  the  reverse,  our 
rich  men  cannot  enjoy  the  wealth  t*hey  have  filched  from 


75  WITHIN  YOU." 


I2I 


the  poor  as  the  ancients  did  who  believed  in  their  right  to 
it.  Their  whole  life  and  all  their  enjoyments  are  embittered 
either  by  the  stings  of  conscience  or  by  terror. 

So  much  for  the  economic  contradiction.  The  political 
contradiction  is  even  more  striking. 

All  men  are  brought  up  to  the  habit  of  obeying  the  laws 
of  the  state  before  everything.  The  whole  existence  of 
modern  times  is  defined  by  laws.  / A man  marries  and 
is  divorced,  educates  his  children,  and  even  (in  many 
countries)  professes  his  religious  faith  in  accordance  with 
the  law.  What  about  the  law  then  which  defines  our  whole 
existence?  Do  men  believe  in  it?  Do  they  regard  it  as 
good  ? Not  at  all.  In  the  majority  of  cases  people  of  the 
present  time  do  not  believe  in  the  justice  of  the  law,  they 
despise  it,  but  still  they  obey  it.  It  was  very  well  for  the 
men  of  the  ancient  world  to  observe  their  laws.  They 
firmly  believed  that  their  law  (it  was  generally  of  a religious 
character)  was  the  only  just  law,  which  everyone  ought  to 
obey.  But  is  it  so  with  us  ? we  know  and  cannot  help 
knowing  that  the  law  of  our  country  is  not  the  one  eternal 
law  ; that  it  is  only  one  of  the  many  laws  of  different 
countries,  which  are  equally  imperfectjjoften  obviously 
wrong  and  unjust,  and  are  criticised  from  every  point  of 
view  in  the  newspapers.  The  Jew  might  well  obey  his 
laws,  since  he  had  not  the  slightest  doubt  that  God  had 
written  them  with  his  finger ; the  Roman  too  might  well 
obey  the  laws  which  he  thought  had  been  dictated  by  the 
nymph  Egeria.  Men  might  well  observe  the  laws  if  they 
believed  the  Tzars  who  made  them  were  God’s  anointed, 
or  even  if  they  thought  they  were  the  work  of  assemblies  of 
lawgivers  who  had  the  power  and  the  desire  to  make  them 
as  good  as  possible.  But  we  all  know  how  our  laws  are 
made.  We  have  all  been  behind  the  scenes,  we  know  that 
they  are  the  product  of  covetousness,  trickery,  and  party 
struggles  ; that  there  is  not  and  cannot  be  any  real  justice 


122 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  COD 


in  them.  And  so  modern  men  cannot  believe  that  obedi- 
ence to  civic  or  political  laws  can  satisfy  the  demands  of 
the  reason  or  of  human  nature.  Men  have  long  ago  recog- 
nized that  it  is  irrational  to  obey  a law  the  justice  of  which 
is  very  doubtful,  and  so  they  cannot  but  suffer  in  obeying 
a law  which  they  do  not  accept  as  judicious  and  binding. 

A man  cannot  but  suffer  when  his  whole  life  is  defined 
beforehand  for  him  by  laws,  which  he  must  obey  under 
threat  of  punishment,  though  he  does  not  believe  in  their 
wisdom  or  justice,  and  often  clearly  perceives  their  injustice, 
cruelty,  and  artificiality. 

We  recognize  the  uselessness  of  customs  and  import 
duties,  and  are  obliged  to  pay  them.  We  recognize  the 
uselessness  of  the  expenditure  on  the  mainte-nance  of  the 
Court  and  other  members  of  Government,  and  we  regard 
the  teaching  of  the  Church  as  injurious,  but  we  are  obliged 
to  bear  our  share  of  the  expenses  of  these  institutions. 
We  regard  the  punishments  inflicted  by  law  as  cruel  and 
shameless,  but  we  must  assist  in  supporting  them.  We 
regard  as  unjust  and  pernicious  the  distribution  of  landed 
property,  but  we  are  obliged  to  submit  to  it.  We  see  no 
necessity  for  wars  and  armies,  but  we  must  bear  terribly 
Jieavy  burdens  in  support  of  troops  and  war  expenses. 

But  this  contradiction  is  nothing  in  comparison  with  the 
contradiction  which  confronts  us  when  we  turn  to  interna- 
tional questions,  and  which  demands  a solution  tinder  pain 
of  the  loss  of  the  sanity  and  even  the  existence  of  the 
human  race.  That  is  the  contradiction  between  the  Chris- 
tian conscience  and  war. 

We  are  all  Christian  nations  living  the  same  spiritual 
life,  so  that  every  noble  and  pregnant  thought,  springing  up 
at  one  end  of  the  world,  is  at  once  communicated  to  the 
whole  of  Christian  humanity  and  evokes  everywhere  the 
same  emotion  of  pride  and  rejoicing  without  distinction  of 
nationalities.  We  who  love  thinkers,  philanthropists,  poets. 


75  WITHIN  YOU. 


123 


and  scientific  men  of  foreign  origin,  and  are  as  proud  of 
the  exploits  of  Father  Damien  as  if  he  were  one  of  our- 
selves, we,  who  have  a simple  love  for  men  of  foreign 
nationalities,  Frenchmen,  Germans,  Americans,  and  Eng- 
lishmen, who  respect  their  qualities,  are  glad  to  meet 
them  and  make  them  so  warmly  welcome,  cannot  regard 
war  with  them  as  anything  heroic.  We  cannot  even 
imagine  without  horror  the  possibility  of  a disagreement 
between  these  people  and  ourselves  which  would  call  for 
reciprocal  murder.  Yet  we  are  all  bound  to  take  a hand  in 
this  slaughter  which  is  bound  to  come  to  pass  to  morrow — 
if  not  to-day. 

It  was  very  well  for  the  Jew,  the  Greek,  and  the  Roman 
to  defend  the  independence  of  his  nation  by  murder.  For 
he  piously  believed  that  his  people  was  the  only  true,  fine, 
and  good  people  dear  to  God,  and  all  the  rest  were  Philis- 
tines, barbarians.  Men  of  mediceval  times — even  up  to  the 
end  of  the  last  and  beginning  of  this  century — might  con- 
tinue to  hold  this  belief.  But  however  much  we  work  upon 
ourselves  we  cannot  believe  it.  And  this  contradiction  for 
men  of  the  present  day  has  become  so  full  of  horror  that 
without  its  solution  life  is  no  longer  possible. 

“We  live  in  a time  which  is  full  of  inconsistencies,” 
writes  Count  Komarovsky,  the  professor  of  international 
law,  in  his  learned  treatise.  “The  press  of  all  countries  is 
continually  expressing  the  universal  desire  for  peace,  and 
the  general  sense  of  its  necessity  for  all  nations. 

“ Representatives  of  governments,  private  persons,  and 
official  organs  say  the  same  thing;  it  is  repeated  in  parlia- 
mentary  debates,  diplomatic  correspondence,  and  even  in 
state  treaties.  At  the  same  time  governments  are  increas- 
ing the  strength  of  their  armies  every  year,  levying  fresh 
taxes,  raising  loans,  and  leaving  as  a bequest  to  future 
generations  the  duty  of  repairing  the  blunders  of  the 
senseless  policy  of  the  present.  What  a striking  contrast 


124 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


between  words  and  deeds  ! Of  course  governments  will 
plead  in  justification  of  these  measures  that  all  their  ex- 
penditure and  armament  are  exclusively  for  purposes  of 
defense.  But  it  remains  a mystery  to  every  disinterested 
man  whence  they  can  expect  attacks  if  all  the  great  powers 
are  single-hearted  in  their  policy,  in  pursuing  nothing 
but  self-defense.  In  reality  it  looks  as  if  each  of  the  great 
powers  were  every  instant  anticipating  an  attack  on  the 
part  of  the  others.  And  this  results  in  a general  feeling  of 
insecurity  and  superhuman  efforts  on  the  part  of  each 
government  to  increase  their  forces  beyond  those  of  the 
other  powers.  Such  a competition  of  itself  increases  the 
danger  of  war.  Nations  cannot  endure  the  constant  in- 
crease of  armies  for  long,  and  sooner  or  later  they  will 
prefer  war  to  all  the  disadvantages  of  their  present  posi- 
tion and  the  constant  menace  of  war.  Then  the  most 
trifling  pretext  will  be  sufficient  to  throw  the  whole  of 
Europe  into  the  fire  of  universal  war.  And  it  is  a mis- 
taken idea  that  such  a crisis  might  deliver  us  from  the 
political  and  economical  troubles  that  are  crushing  us. 
The  experience  of  the  wars  of  latter  years  teaches  us  that 
every  war  has  only  intensified  national  hatreds,  made  mili- 
tary burdens  more  crushing  and  insupportable,  and  ren- 
dered the  political  and  economical  position  of  Europe  more 
grievous  and  insoluble.” 

“Modern  Europe  keeps  under  arms  an  active  army  of 
nine  millions  of  men,”  writes  Enrico  Ferri,  “besides  fifteen 
millions  of  reserve,  with  an  outlay  of  four  hundred  millions 
of  francs  per  annum.  By  continual  increase  of  the  armed 
force,  the  sources  of  social  and  individual  prosperity  are 
paralyzed,  and  the  state  of  the  modern  world  may  be  com- 
pared to  that  of  a man  who  condemns  himself  to  wasting 
from  lack  of  nutrition  in  order  to  provide  himself  with 
arms,  losing  thereby  the  strength  to  use  the  arms  he  pro- 
vides, under  the  weight  of  which  he  will  at  last  succumb.” 


IS  WITHIN  YOU: 


125 


Charles  Booth,  in  his  paper  read  in  London  before  the 
Association  for  the  Reform  and  Codification  of  the  Law 
of  Nations,  June  26,  1887,  says  the  same  thing.  After 
referring  to  the  same  number,  nine  millions  of  the  active 
army  and  fifteen  millions  of  reserve,  and  the  enormous 
expenditure  of  governments  on  the  support  and  arming  of 
these  forces,  he  says  ; “ These  figures  represent  only  a 
small  part  of  the  real  cost,  because  besides  the  recognized 
expenditure  of  the  war  budget  of  the  various  nations,  we 
ought  also  to  take  into  account  the  enormous  loss  to  society 
involved  in  withdrawing  from  it  such  an  immense  number 
of  its  most  vigorous  men,  who  are  taken  from  industrial 
pursuits  and  every  kind  of  labor,  as  well  as  the  enormous 
interest  on  the  sums  expended  on  military  preparations 
without  any  return.  The  inevitable  result  of  this  ex- 
penditure on  war  and  preparations  for  war  is  a contin- 
ually growing  national  debt.  The  greater  number  of 
loans  raised  by  the  governments  of  Europe  were  with 
a view  to  war.  Their  total  sum  amounts  to  four  hundred 
millions  sterling,  and  these  debts  are  increasing  every 
year.” 

The  same  Professor  Komarovsky  says  in  another  place  : 
“ We  live  in  troubled  times.  Everywhere  we  hear  com- 
plaints of  the  depression  of  trade  and  manufactures,  and 
the  wretchedness  of  the  economic  position  generally,  the 
miserable  conditions  of  existence  of  the  working  classes, 
and  the  universal  impoverishment  of  the  masses.  But  in 
spite  of  this,  governments  in  their  efforts  to  maintain  their 
independence  rush  to  the  greatest  extremes  of  senseless- 
ness. New  taxes  and  duties  are  being  devised  everywhere, 
and  the  financial  oppression  of  the  nations  knows  no  limits. 
If  we  glance  at  the  budgets  of  the  states  of  Europe  for  the 
last  hundred  years,  what  strikes  us  most  of  all  is  their  rapid 
and  continually  growing  increase. 

“ How  can  we  explain  this  extraordinary  phenomenon. 


126 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  COD 


which  sooner  or  later  threatens  us  all  with  inevitable  bank, 
ruptcy  ? 

“ It  is  caused  beyond  dispute  by  the  expenditure  for  the 
maintenance  of  armaments  which  swallows  up  a third  and 
even  a half  of  all  the  expenditure  of  European  states. 
And  the  most  melancholy  thing  is  that  one  can  foresee  no 
limit  to  this  augmentation  of  the  budget  and  impoverish- 
ment of  the  masses.  What  is  socialism  but  a protest  against 
this  abnormal  position  in  which  the  greater  proportion  of 
the  population  of  our  world  is  placed?” 

” We  are  ruining  ourselves,”  says  Frederick  Passy  in  a 
letter  read  before  the  last  Congress  of  Universal  Peace  (in 
1890)  in  London,  “ we  are  ruining  ourselves  in  order  to  be 
able  to  take  part  in  the  senseless  wars  of  the  future  or  to 
pay  the  interest  on  debts  we  have  incurred  by  the  sense- 
less and  criminal  wars  of  the  past.  We  are  dying  of 
hunger  so  as  to  secure  the  means  of  killing  each  other.” 

Speaking  later  on  of  the  way  the  subject  is  looked  at  in 
France,  he  says  ; “ We  believe  that,  a hundred  years  after  the 
Declaration  of  the  Rights  of  Man  and  of  the  citizen,  the 
time  has  come  to  recognize  the  rights  of  nations  and  to 
renounce  at  once  and  forever  all  those  undertakings  based 
on  fraud  and  force,  which,  under  the  name  of  conquests, 
are  veritable  crimes  against  humanity,  and  which,  whatever 
the  vanity  of  monarchs  and  the  pride  of  nations  may  think 
of  them,  only  weaken  even  those  who  are  triumphant  over 
them.” 

“ I am  surprised  at  the  way  religion  is  carried  on  in  this 
country,”  said  Sir  Wilfrid  Lawson  at  the  same  congress. 
“You  send  a boy  to  Sunday  school,  and  you  tell  him: 
‘ Dear  boy,  you  must  love  your  enemies.  If  another  boy 
strikes  you,  you  mustn’t  hit  him  back,  but  try  to  reform 
him  by  loving  him.’  Well.  The  boy  stays  in  the  Sunday 
school  till  he  is  fourteen  or  fifteen,  and  then  his  friends 
send  him  into  the  army.  W hat  has  he  to  do  in  the  army  ? 


IS  WITHIN  you: 


127 


He  certainly  won’t  love  his  enemy  ; quite  the  contrary,  if  he 
can  only  get  at  him,  he  will  run  him  through  with  his  bay- 
onet. That  is  the  nature  of  all  religious  teaching  in  this 
country.  I do  not  think  that  that  is  a very  good  way  of 
carrying  out  the  precepts  of  religion.  I think  if  it  is  a 
good  thing  for  a boy  to  love  his  enemy,  it  is  good  for  a 
grown-up  man.” 

“ There  are  in  Europe  twenty-eight  millions  of  men 
under  arms,”  says  Wilson,  “to  decide  disputes,  not  by 
discussion,  but  by  murdering  one  another.  That  is  the 
accepted  method  for  deciding  disputes  among  Christian 
nations.  This  method  is,  at  the  same  time,  very  expensive, 
for,  according  to  the  statistics  I have  read,  the  nations  of 
Europe  spent  in  the  year  1872  a hundred  and  fifty  millions 
sterling  on  preparations  for  deciding  disputes  by  means  of 
murder.  It  seems  to  me,  therefore,  that  in  such  a state  of 
things  one  of  two  alternatives  must  be  admitted  : either 
Cliristianity  is  a failure,  or  those  who  have  undertaken  to 
expound  it  have  failed  in  doing  so.  Until  our  warriors  are 
disarmed  and  our  armies  disbanded,  we  have  not  the  right 
to  call  ourselves  a Christian  nation.” 

In  a conference  on  the  subject  of  the  duty  of  Christian 
ministers  to  preach  against  war,  G.  D.  Bartlett  said  among 
other  things  : “If  I understand  the  Scriptures,  I say  that 
men  are  only  playing  with  Christianity  so  long  as  they 
ignore  the  question  of  war.  I have  lived  a longish  life 
and  have  heard  our  ministers  preach  on  universal  peace 
hardly  half  a dozen  times.  Twenty  years  ago,  in  a drawing 
room,  I dared  in  the  presence  of  forty  persons  to  moot  the 
proposition  that  war  was  incompatible  with  Christianity  ; I 
was  regarded  as  an  arrant  fanatic.  The  idea  that  we  could 
get  on  without  war  was  regarded  as  unmitigated  weakness 
and  folly.” 

The  Catholic  priest  Defourney  has  expressed  himself  in 
the  same  spirit.  “ One  of  the  first  precepts  of  the  eternal 


128 


‘ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


law  inscribed  in  the  consciences  of  all  men,”  says  the  Abb6 
Defourney,  ” is  the  prohibition  of  taking  the  life  or  shed- 
ding the  blood  of  a fellow-creature  without  sufficient 
cause,  without  being  forced  into  the  necessity  of  it.  This 
is  one  of  the  commandments  which  is  most  deeply  stamped 
in  the  heart  of  man.  But  so  soon  as  it  is  a question  of 
war,  that  is,  of  shedding  blood  in  torrents,  men  of  the 
present  day  do  not  trouble  themselves  about  a sufficient 
cause.  Those  who  take  part  in  wars  do  not  even  think  of 
asking  themselves  whether  there  is  any  justification  for 
these  innumerable  murders,  whether  they  are  justifiable  or 
unjustifiable,  lawful  or  unlawful,  innocent  or  criminal  ; 
whether  they  are  breaking  that  fundamental  commandment 
that  forbids  killing  without  lawful  cause.  But  their  con- 
science is  mute.  War  has  ceased  to  be  something  depend- 
ent on  moral  considerations.  In  warfare  men  have  in  all 
the  toil  and  dangers  they  endure  no  other  pleasure  than 
that  of  being  conquerors,  no  sorrow  other  than  that  of 
being  conquered.  Don’t  tell  me  that  they  are  serving 
their  country.  A great  genius  answered  that  long  ago  in 
the  words  that  have  become  a proverb:  ‘ Without  justice, 
what  is  an  empire  but  a great  band  of  brigands?’  And  is 
not  every  band  of  brigands  a little  empire  ? They  too 
have  their  laws  ; and  they  too  make  war  to  gain  booty,  and 
even  for  honor. 

“ The  aim  of  the  proposed  institution  [the  institution  of 
an  international  board  of  arbitration]  is  that  the  nations 
of  Europe  may  cease  to  be  nations  of  robbers,  and  their 
armies,  bands  of  brigands.  And  one  must  add,  not  only 
brigands,  but  slaves.  For  our  armies  are  simply  gangs  of 
slaves  at  the  disposal  of  one  or  two  commanders  or  min- 
isters, who  exercise  a despotic  control  over  them  without 
any  real  responsibility,  as  we  very  well  know. 

“ The  peculiarity  of  a slave  is  that  he  is  a mere  tool  in 
the  hands  of  his  master,  a thing,  not  a m.an.  That  is  just 


75  WITHIN  YOU. 


129 


what  soldiers,  officers,  and  generals  are,  going  to  murder 
and  be  murdered  at  the  will  of  a ruler  or  rulers.  Military 
slavery  is  an  actual  fact,  and  it  is  the  worst  form  of  slaver)’-, 
especially  now  when  by  means  of  compulsory  service  it  lays 
its  fetters  on  the  necks  of  all  the  strong  and  capable  men 
of  a nation,  to  make  them  instruments  of  murder,  butchers 
of  human  flesh,  for  that  is  all  they  are  taken  and  trained 
to  do. 

“ The  rulers,  two  or  three  in  number,  meet  together  in 
cabinets,  secretly  deliberate  without  registers,  without  pub- 
licity, and  consequently  without  responsibility,  and  send 
men  to  be  murdered.” 

“ Protests  against  armaments,  burdensome  to  the  people, 
have  not  originated  in  our  times,”  says  Signor  E.  G.  Moneta. 
“ Hear  what  Montesquieu  wrote  in  his  day.  ‘ France  [and 
one  might  say,  Europe]  will  be  ruined  by  soldiers.  A new 
plague  is  spreading  throughout  Europe.  It  attacks  sov- 
ereigns and  forces  them  to  maintain  an  incredible  number 
of  armed  men.  This  plague  is  infectious  and  spreads, 
because  directly  one  government  increases  its  armament,  all 
the  others  do  likewise.  So  that  nothing  is  gained  by  it  but 
general  ruin. 

“ ‘ Every  government  maintains  as  great  an  army  as  it 
possibly  could  maintain  if  its  people  were  threatened  with 
extermination,  and  people  call  peace  this  state  of  tension 
of  all  against  all.  And  therefore  Europe  is  so  ruined  that 
if  private  persons  were  in  the  position  of  the  governments 
of  our  continent,  the  richest  of  them  would  not  have 
enough  to  live  on.  We  are  poor  though  we  have  the  wealth 
and  trade  of  the  whole  world.’ 

“That  was  written  almost  150  years  ago.  The  picture 
seems  drawn  from  the  world  of  to-day.  One  thing  only 
has  changed — the  form  of  government.  In  Montesquieu’s 
time  it  was  said  that  the  cause  of  the  maintenance  of 
great  armaments  was  the  despotic  power  of  kings,  who 


130 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


made  war  in  the  hope  of  augmenting  by  conquest  their 
personal  revenues  and  gaining  glory.  People  used  to  say 
then:  ‘Ah,  if  only  people  could  elect  those  who  would 
have  the  right  to  refuse  governments  the  soldiers  and  the 
money — then  there  would  be  an  end  to  military  politics.’ 
Now  there  are  representative  governments  in  almost  the 
whole  of  Europe,  and  in  spite  of  that,  war  expenditures 
and  the  preparations  for  war  have  increased  to  alarming 
proportions. 

“ It  is  evident  that  the  insanity  of  sovereigns  has  gained 
possession  of  the  ruling  classes.  War  is  not  made  now  be- 
cause one  king  has  been  wanting  in  civility  to  the  mistress 
of  another  king,  as  it  was  in  Louis  XIV. ’s  time.  But  the 
natural  and  honorable  sentiments  of  national  honor  and 
patriotism  are  so  exaggerated,  and  the  public  opinion  of 
one  nation  so  excited  against  another,  that  it  is  enough  for 
a statement  to  be  made  (even  though  it  may  be  a false 
report)  that  the  ambassador  of  one  state  was  not  received 
by  the  principal  personage  of  another  state  to  cause  the 
outbreak  of  the  most  awful  and  destructive  war  there  has 
ever  been  seen.  Europe  keeps  more  soldiers  under  arms 
to-day  than  in  the  time  of  the  great  Napoleonic  wars.  All 
citizens  with  few  exceptions  are  forced  to  spend  some  years 
in  barracks.  Fortresses,  arsenals,  and  ships  are  built,  new 
weapons  are  constantly  being  invented,  to  be  replaced  in  a 
short  time  by  fresh  ones,  for,  sad  to  say,  science,  which 
ought  always  to  be  aiming  at  the  good  of  humanity,  assists 
in  the  work  of  destruction,  and  is  constantly  inventing  new 
means  for  killing  the  greatest  number  of  men  in  the  shortest 
time.  And  to  maintain  so  great  a multitude  of  soldiers  and 
to  make  such  vast  preparations  for  murder,  hundreds  of 
millions  are  spent  annually,  sums  which  would  be  sufficient 
for  the  education  of  the  people  and  for  immense  works  of 
public  utility,  and  which  would  make  it  possible  to  find  a 
peaceful  solution  of  the  social  question. 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


131 

“ Europe,  then,  is,  in  this  respect,  in  spite  of  all  the  con- 
quests of  science,  in  the  same  position  as  in  the  darkest 
and  most  barbarous  days  of  the  Middle  Ages.  All  deplore 
this  state  of  things — neither  peace  nor  war — and  all  would 
be  glad  to  escape  from  it.  The  heads  of  governments  all 
declare  that  thej'^  all  wish  for  peace,  and  vie  with  one 
anotlier  in  the  most  solemn  protestations  of  peaceful  inten- 
tions. But  the  same  day  or  the  ne.\t  they  will  lay  a scheme 
for  the  increase  of  the  armament  before  their  legislative 
assembly,  saying  that  these  are  the  preventive  measures 
they  take  for  the  very  purpose  of  securing  peace. 

“ But  this  is  not  the  kind  of  peace  we  want.  And  the 
nations  are  not  deceived  by  it.  True  peace  is  based  on 
mutual  confidence,  while  these  huge  armaments  show  open 
and  utter  lack  of  confidence,  if  not  concealed  hostility, 
between  states.  What  should  we  say  of  a man  who,  want- 
ing to  show  his  friendly  feelings  for  his  neighbor,  should 
invite  him  to  discuss  their  differences  with  a loaded  revolver 
in  his  hand  ? 

“ It  is  just  this  flagrant  contradiction  between  the  peace- 
ful professions  and  the  warlike  policy  of  governments 
which  all  good  citizens  desire  to  put  an  end  to,  at  any 
cost.” 

People  are  astonished  that  every  year  there  are  sixty 
thousand  cases  of  suicide  in  Europe,  and  those  only  the 
recognized  and  recorded  cases — and  excluding  Russia  and 
Turkey  ; but  one  ought  rather  to  be  surprised  that  there 
are  so  few.  Every  man  of  the  present  day,  if  w^e  go  deep 
enough  into  the  contradiction  between  his  conscience  and 
his  life,  is  in  a state  of  despair. 

Not  to  speak  of  all  the  other  contradictions  between 
modern  life  and  the  conscience,  the  permanently  armed 
condition  of  Europe  together  with  its  profession  of  Chris- 
tianity is  alone  enough  to  drive  any  man  to  despair,  to  doubt 
of  the  sanity  of  mankind,  and  to  terminate  an  existence  in 


132 


” THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


this  senseless  and  brutal  world.  This  contradiction,  which 
is  a quintessence  of  all  the  other  contradictions,  is  so  ter- 
rible that  to  live  and  to  take  part  in  it  is  only  possible  if 
one  does  not  think  of  it — if  one  is  able  to  forget  it. 

What  ! all  of  us,  Christians,  not  only  profess  to  love  one 
another,  but  do  actually  live  one  common  life  ; we  whose 
social  existence  beats  with  one  common  pulse — we  aid  one 
another,  learn  from  one  another,  draw  ever  closer  to  one 
another  to  our  mutual  happiness,  and  find  in  this  closeness 
the  whole  meaning  of  life ! — and  to-morrow  some  crazy 
ruler  will  say  some  stupidity,  and  another  will  answer  in 
the  same  spirit,  and  then  I must  go  expose  myself  to  being 
murdered,  and  murder  men — who  have  done  me  no  harm — 
and  more  than  that,  whom  I love.  And  this  is  not  a remote 
contingency,  but  the  veiy  thing  we  are  all  preparing  for, 
which  is  not  only  probable,  but  an  inevitable  certainty. 

To  recognize  this  clearly  is  enough  to  drive  a man  out 
of  his  senses  or  to  make  him  shoot  himself.  And  this  is 
just  what  does  happen,  and  especially  often  among  military 
men.  A man  need  only  come  to  himself  for  an  instant  to 
be  impelled  inevitably  to  such  an  end. 

And  this  is  the  only  explanation  of  the  dreadful  inten- 
sity with  which  men  of  modern  times  strive  to  stupefy 
themselves,  with  spirits,  tobacco,  opium,  cards,  reading 
newspapers,  traveling,  and  all  kinds  of  spectacles  and 
amusements.  These  pursuits  are  followed  up  as  an  impor- 
tant, serious  business.  And  indeed  they  are  a serious 
business.  If  there  were  no  external  means  of  dulling  their 
sensibilities,  half  of  mankind  would  shoot  themselves  with- 
out delay,  for  to  live  in  opposition  to  one’s  reason  is  the 
most  intolerable  condition.  And  that  is  the  condition  of 
all  men  of  the  present  day.  All  men  of  the  modern  world 
exist  in  a state  of  continual  and  flagrant  antagonism 
between  their  conscience  and  their  way  of  life.  This 
antagonism  is  apparent  in  economic  as  well  as  polit- 


IS  WITHm  YOU. 


133 


ical  life.  But  most  striking  of  all  is  the  contradiction 
between  the  Christian  law  of  the  brotherhood  of  men 
existing  in  the  conscience  and  the  necessity  under  which 
all  men  are  placed  by  compulsory  military  service  of  being 
prepared  for  hatred  and  murder — of  being  at  the  same 
time  a Christian  and  a gladiator. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

ATTITUDE  OF  MEN  OF  THE  PRESENT  DAY  TO  WAR. 

People  do  not  Try  to  Remove  the  Contradiction  between  Life  and  Con- 
science by  a Change  of  Life,  but  their  Cultivated  Leaders  Exert  Every 
Effort  to  Obscure  the  Demands  of  Conscience,  and  Justify  their  Life  ; 
in  this  Way  they  Degrade  Society  below  Paganism  to  a State  of  Prime- 
val Barbarism — Undefined  Attitude  of  Modern  Leaders  of  Thought  to 
War,  to  Universal  Militarism,  and  to  Compulsory  Service  in  Army — 
One  Section  Regards  War  as  an  Accidental  Political  Phenomenon,  to 
be  Avoided  by  External  Measures  only — Peace  Congress — The  Article 
in  the  Revue  des  Revues — Proposition  of  Maxime  du  Camp — 
Value  of  Boards  of  Arbitration  and  Suppression  of  Armies — Attitude 
of  Governments  to  Men  of  this  Opinion  and  What  they  Do — Another 
Section  Regards  War  as  Cruel,  but  Inevitable — Maupassant — Rod — A 
Third  Section  Regard  War  as  Necessary,  and  not  without  its  Advantages 
— Doucet — Claretie — Zola — V ogUe. 

The  antagonism  between  life  and  the  conscience  may 
be  removed  in  two  ways;  by  a change  of  life  or  by  a change 
of  conscience.  And  there  would  seem  there  can  be  no 
doubt  as  to  these  alternatives. 

A man  may  cease  to  do  what  he  regards  as  wrong,  but  he 
cannot  cease  to  consider  wrong  what  is  wrong.  Just  in  the 
same  way  all  humanity  may  cease  to  do  what  it  regards  as 
wrong,  but  far  from  being  able  to  change,  it  cannot  even 
retard  for  a time  the  continual  growth  of  a clearer  recogni- 
tion of  what  is  wrong  and  therefore  ought  not  to  be.  And 


134 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


therefore  it  would  seem  inevitable  for  Christian  men  to 
abandon  the  pagan  forms  of  society  which  they  condemn, 
and  to  reconstruct  their  social  existence  on  the  Christian 
principles  they  profess. 

So  it  would  be  were  it  not  for  the  law  of  inertia,  as  immu- 
table a force  in  men  and  nations  as  in  inanimate  bodies. 
In  men  it  takes  the  form  of  the  psychological  principle,  so 
truly  expressed  in  the  words  of  the  Gospel,  “They  have 
loved  darkness  better  than  light  because  their  deeds  were 
evil.”  This  principle  shows  itself  in  men  not  trying  to 
recognize  the  truth,  but  to  persuade  themselves  that  the  life 
they  are  leading,  which  is  what  they  like  and  are  used  to, 
is  a life  perfectly  consistent  with  truth. 

Slavery  was  opposed  to  all  the  moral  principles  advocated 
by  Plato  and  Aristotle,  yet  neither  of  them  saw  that, 
because  to  renounce  slavery  would  have  meant  the  break 
up  of  the  life  they  were  living.  We  see  the  same  thing  in 
our  modern  world. 

The  division  of  men  into  two  castes,  as  well  as  the  use  of 
force  in  government  and  war,  are  opposed  to  every  moral 
principle  professed  by  our  modern  society.  Yet  the  culti- 
vated and  advanced  men  of  the  day  seem  not  to  see  it. 

The  majority,  if  not  all,  of  the  cultivated  men  of  our  day 
try  unconsciously  to  maintain  the  old  social  conception  of 
life,  which  justifies  their  position,  and  to  hide  from  them- 
selves and  others  its  insufficiency,  and  above  all  the  necessity 
of  adopting  the  Christian  conception  of  life,  which  will  mean 
the  break  up  of  the  whole  existing  social  order.  They 
struggle  to  keep  up  the  organization  based  on  the  social 
conception  of  life,  but  do  not  believe  in  it  themselves, 
because  it  is  extinct  and  it  is  impossible  to  believe  in  it. 

All  modern  literature — philosophical,  political,  and  artis- 
tic— is  striking  in  this  respect.  What  wealth  of  idea,  of 
form,  of  color,  what  erudition,  what  art,  but  what  a lack  of 
serious  matter,  what  dread  of  any  exactitude  of  thought  or 


/S  WITHIN  YOU." 


135 


expression ! Subtleties,  allegories,  humorous  fancies,  the 
widest  generalizations,  but  nothing  simple  and  clear,  noth- 
ing going  straight  to  the  point,  that  is,  to  the  problem  of  life. 

But  that  is  not  all;  besides  these  graceful  frivolities,  our 
literature  is  full  of  simple  nastiness  and  brutality,  of  argu- 
ments which  would  lead  men  back  in  the  most  refined  way 
to  primeval  barbarism,  to  the  principles  not  only  of  the 
pagan,  but  even  of  the  animal  life,  which  we  have  left  be- 
hind us  five  thousand  years  ago. 

And  it  could  not  be  otherwise.  In  their  dread  of  the 
Christian  conception  of  life  which  will  destroy  the  social 
order,  which  some  cling  to  only  from  habit,  others  also  from 
interest,  men  cannot  but  be  thrown  back  upon  the  pagan 
conception  of  life  and  the  principles  based  on  it.  Nowa- 
days we  see  advocated  not  only  patriotism  and  aristocratic 
principles  just  as  they  were  advocated  two  thousand  years 
ago,  but  even  the  coarsest  epicureanism  and  animalism,  only 
with  this  difference,  that  the  men  who  then  professed  those 
views  believed  in  them,  while  nowadays  even  the  advocates 
of  such  views  do  not  believe  in  them,  for  they  have  no  mean- 
ing for  the  present  day.  No  one  can  stand  still  when  the 
earth  is  shaking  under  his  feet.  If  we  do  not  go  forward 
we  must  go  back.  And  strange  and  terrible  to  say,  the 
cultivated  men  of  our  day,  the  leaders  of  thought,  are  in 
reality  with  their  subtle  reasoning  drawing  society  back,  not 
to  paganism  even,  but  to  a state  of  primitive  barbarism. 

This  tendency  on  the  part  of  the  leading  thinkers  of  the 
day  is  nowhere  more  apparent  than  in  their  attitude  to  the 
phenomenon  in  which  all  the  insufficiency  of  the  social  con- 
ception of  life  is  presented  in  the  most  concentrated  form — 
in  their  attitude,  that  is,  to  war,  to  the  general  arming  of 
nations,  and  to  universal  compulsory  service. 

The  undefined,  if  not  disingenuous,  attitude  of  modern 
thinkers  to  this  phenomenon  is  striking.  It  takes  three 
forms  in  cultivated  society.  One  section  look  at  it  as  an 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


136 

incidental  phenomenon,  arising  out  of  the  special  political 
situation  of  Europe,  and  consider  that  this  state  of  things 
can  be  reformed  without  a revolution  in  the  whole  internal 
social  order  of  nations,  by  external  measures  of  international 
diplomacy.  Another  section  regard  it  as  something  cruel 
and  hideous,  but  at  the  same  time  fated  and  inevitable,  like 
disease  and  death.  A third  party  with  cool  indifference 
consider  war  as  an  inevitable  phenomenon,  beneficial  in  its 
effects  and  therefore  desirable. 

Men  look  at  the  subject  from  different  points  of  view,  but 
all  alike  talk  of  war  as  though  it  w’ere  something  absolutely 
independent  of  the  will  of  those  who  take  part  in  it.  And 
consequently  they  do  not  even  admit  the  natural  question 
which  presents  itself  to  every  simple  man:  “How  about 
me — ought  I to  take  any  part  in  it?’’  In  their  view  no 
question  of  this  kind  even  exists,  and  every  man,  however 
he  may  regard  war  from  a personal  standpoint,  must  slavishly 
submit  to  the  requirements  of  the  authorities  on  the  subject. 

The  attitude  of  the  first  section  of  thinkers,  those  who  see 
a way  out  of  war  in  international  diplomatic  measures,  is  well 
expressed  in  the  report  of  the  last  Peace  Congress  in  Lon- 
don, and  the  articles  and  letters  upon  war  that  appeared  in 
No.  8 of  the  Revue  des  Revues,  1891.  The  congress  after 
gathering  together  from  various  quarters  the  verbal  and 
written  opinion  of  learned  men  opened  the  proceedings  by 
a religious  service,  and  after  listening  to  addresses  for  five 
whole  days,  concluded  them  by  a public  dinner  and 
speeches.  They  adopted  the  following  resolutions: 

“1.  The  congress  affirms  its  belief  that  the  brotherhood 
of  man  involves  as  a necessary  consequence  a brotherhood 
of  nations. 

“2.  The  congress  recognizes  the  important  influence  that 
Christianity  exercises  on  the  moral  and  political  progress  of 
mankind,  and  earnestly  urges  upon  ministers  of  the  Gospel 
and  other  religious  teachers  the  duty  of  setting  forth  the 


75  WITHIN  YOU. 


137 


principles  of  peace  and  good  will  toward  men.  And  it 
recommends  that  the  third  Sunday  in  December  be  set  apart  for 
that  piirpose. 

*‘3.  The  congress  expresses  the  opinion  that  all  teachers 
of  history  should  call  the  attention  of  the  young  to  the  grave 
evils  inflicted  on  mankind  in  all  ages  by  war,  and  to  the  fact 
that  such  war  has  been  waged  for  most  inadequate  causes. 

“4.  The  congress  protests  against  the  use  of  military 
drill  in  schools  by  way  of  physical  exercise,  and  suggests 
the  formation  of  brigades  for  saving  life  rather  than  of  a 
quasi-military  character;  and  urges  the  desirability  of 
impressing  on  the  Board  of  Examiners  who  formulate  the 
questions  for  examination  the  propriety  of  guiding  the 
minds  of  children  in  the  principles  of  peace. 

“5.  The  congress  holds  that  the  doctrine  of  the  Rights 
of  Man  requires  that  the  aboriginal  and  weaker  races,  their 
territories  and  liberties,  shall  be  guarded  from  injustice  and 
fraud,  and  that  these  races  shall  be  shielded  against  the 
vices  so  prevalent  among  the  so-called  advanced  races  of 
men.  It  further  expresses  its  conviction  that  there  should 
be  concert  of  action  among  the  nations  for  the  accomplish- 
ment of  these  ends.  The  congress  expresses  its  hearty 
appreciation  of  the  resolutions  of  the  Anti-slavery  Confer- 
ence held  recently  at  Brussels  for  the  amelioration  of  the 
condition  of  the  peoples  of  Africa. 

“6.  The  congress  believes  that  the  warlike  prejudices 
and  traditions  which  are  still  fostered  in  the  various  nation- 
alities, and  the  misrepresentations  by  leaders  of  public 
opinion  in  legislative  assemblies  or  through  the  press,  are 
often  indirect  causes  of  war,  and  that  these  evils  should  be 
counteracted  by  the  publication  of  accurate  information 
tending  to  the  removal  of  misunderstanding  between  nations, 
and  recommends  the  importance  of  considering  the  question 
of  commencing  an  international  newspaper  with  such  a 
purpose. 


138  “ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 

“7.  The  congress  proposes  to  the  Inter-parliamentary 
Conference  that  the  utmost  support  should  be  given  to  every 
project  for  unification  of  weights  and  measures,  coinage, 
tariff,  postage,  and  telegraphic  arrangements,  etc.,  which 
would  assist  in  constituting  a commercial,  industrial,  and 
scientific  union  of  the  peoples. 

“8.  The  congress,  in  view  of  the  vast  social  and  moral 
influence  of  woman,  urges  upon  every  woman  to  sustain  the 
things  that  make  for  peace,  as  otherwise  she  incurs  grave 
responsibility  for  the  continuance  of  the  systems  of  mili- 
tarism, 

“9  The  congress  expresses  the  hope  that  the  Financial 
Reform  Association  and  other  similar  societies  in  Europe 
and  America  should  unite  in  considering  means  for  estab- 
lishing equitable  commercial  relations  between  states,  by 
the  reduction  of  import  duties.  The  congress  feels  that  it 
can  affirm  that  the  whole  of  Europe  desires  peace,  and 
awaits  with  impatience  the  suppression  of  armaments,  which, 
under  the  plea  of  defense,  become  in  their  turn  a danger  by 
keeping  alive  mutual  distrust,  and  are,  at  the  same  time, 
the  cause  of  that  general  economic  disturbance  which 
stands  in  the  way  of  settling  in  a satisfactory  manner  the 
problems  of  labor  and  poverty,  which  ought  to  take  prece- 
dence of  all  others. 

“10.  The  congress,  recognizing  that  a general  disarma- 
ment would  be  the  best  guarantee  of  peace  and  would  lead 
to  the  solution  of  the  questions  which  now  most  divide 
states,  expresses  the  wish  that  a congress  of  representatives 
of  all  the  states  of  Europe  may  be  assembled  as  soon  as 
possible  to  consider  the  means  of  effecting  a gradual  general 
disarmament. 

“ii.  The  congress,  in  consideration  of  the  fact  that  the 
timidity  of  a single  power  might  delay  the  convocation  of 
the  above-mentioned  congress,  is  of  opinion  that  the  govern- 
ment which  should  first  dismiss  any  considerable  number  of 


75  WITHIN  YOU." 


139 


soldiers  would  confer  a signal  benefit  on  Europe  and  man- 
kind, because  it  would,  by  public  opinion,  oblige  other 
governments  to  follow  its  example,  and  by  the  moral  force 
of  this  accomplished  fact  would  have  increased  rather  than 
diminished  the  conditions  of  its  national  defense. 

“12.  The  congress,  considering  the  question  of  disarma- 
ment, as  of  peace  in  general,  depends  on  public  opinion, 
recommends  the  peace  societies,  as  well  as  all  friends  of 
peace,'  to  be  active  in  its  propaganda,  especially  at  the  time 
of  parliamentary  elections,  in  order  that  the  electors  should 
give  their  votes  to  candidates  who  are  pledged  to  support 
Peace,  Disarmament,  and  Arbitration. 

“13.  The  congress  congratulates  the  friends  of  peace  on 
the  resolution  adopted  by  the  International  American  Con- 
ference, held  at  Washington  in  April  last,  by  which  it  was 
recommended  that  arbitration  should  be  obligatory  in  all 
controversies,  whatever  their  origin,  except  only  those  which 
may  imperil  the  independence  of  one  of  the  nations  involved. 

“14.  The  congress  recommends  this  resolution  to  the 
attention  of  European  statesmen,  and  expresses  the  ardent 
desire  that  similar  treaties  may  speedily  be  entered  into  be- 
tween the  other  nations  of  the  world. 

“15.  The  congress  expresses  its  satisfaction  at  the  adop- 
tion by  the  Spanish  Senate  on  June  16  last  of  a project  of 
law  authorizing  the  government  to  negotiate  general  or 
special  treaties  of  arbitration  for  the  settlement  of  all  dis- 
putes except  those  relating  to  the  independence  or  internal 
government  of  the  states  affected;  also  at  the  adoption  of 
resolutions  to  a like  effect  by  the  Norwegian  Storthing  and 
by  the  Italian  Chamber. 

“16.  The  congress  resolves  that  a committee  be  ap- 
pointed to  address  communications  to  the  principal  political, 
religious,  commercial,  and  labor  and  peace  organizations, 
requesting  them  to  send  petitons  to  the  governmental 
authorities  praying  that  measures  be  taken  for  the  formation 


14°  *•  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 

of  suitable  tribunals  for  the  adjudicature  of  international 
questions  so  as  to  avoid  the  resort  to  war. 

“17.  Seeing  (i)  that  the  object  pursued  by  all  peace 
societies  is  the  establishment  of  judicial  order  between 
nations,  and  (2)  that  neutralization  by  international  treaties 
constitutes  a step  toward  this  judicial  state  and  lessens  the 
number  of  districts  in  which  war  can  be  carried  on,  the 
congress  recommends  a larger  extension  of  the  rule  of 
neutralization,  and  expresses  the  wish,  (i)  that  all  treaties 
which  at  present  assure  to  certain  states  the  benefit  of 
neutrality  remain  in  force,  or  if  necessary  be  amended  in  a 
manner  to  render  the  neutrality  more  effective,  either  by 
extending  neutralization  to  the  whole  of  the  state  or  by 
ordering  the  demolition  of  fortresses,  which  constitute 
rather  a peril  than  a guarantee  for  neutrality;  (2)  that  new 
treaties  in  harmony  with  the  wishes  of  the  populations  con- 
cerned be  concluded  for  establishing  the  neutralization  of 
other  states. 

“18.  The  sub-committee  proposes,  (i)  that  the  annual 
Peace  Congress  should  be  held  either  immediately  before 
the  meeting  of  the  annual  Sub-parliamentary  Conference,  or 
immediately  after  it  in  the  same  town  ; (2)  that  the  question 
of  an  international  peace  emblem  be  postponed  sine  die ; 
(3)  that  the  following  resolutions  be  adopted: 

“<7.  To  express  satisfaction  at  the  official  overtures  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States  addressed  to  the 
highest  representatives  of  each  church  organization  in 
Christendom  to  unite  in  a general  conference  to  promote  the 
substitution  of  international  arbitration  for  war. 

"b.  To  express  in  the  name  of  the  congress  its  profound 
reverence  for  the  memory  of  Aurelio  Saffi,  the  great  Italian 
jurist,  a member  of  the  committee  of  the  International 
League  of  Peace  and  Liberty. 

“(4)  That  the  memorial  adopted  by  this  congress  and 
signed  by  the  president  to  the  heads  of  the  civilized  states 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


t4t 

should,  as  far  as  practicable,  be  presented  to  each  power  by 
influential  deputations. 

“(5)  That  the  following  resolutions  be  adopted; 

"a.  A resolution  of  thanks  to  the  presidents  of  the  various 
sittings  of  the  congress. 

"b.  A resolution  of  thanks  to  the  chairman,  the  secre- 
taries, and  the  members  of  the  bureau  of  the  congress. 

"c.  A resolution  of  thanks  to  the  conveners  and  members 
of  the  sectional  committees. 

"d.  A resolution  of  thanks  to  Rev.  Canon  Scott  Holland, 
Rev.  Dr.  Reuen  Thomas,  and  Rev.  J.  Morgan  Gibbon  for 
their  pulpit  addresses  before  the  congress,  and  also  to  the 
authorities  of  St.  Paul’s  Cathedral,  the  City  Temple,  and 
Stamford  Hill  Congregational  Church  for  the  use  of  those 
buildings  for  public  services. 

"e.  A letter  of  thanks  to  her  Majesty  for  permission  to 
visit  Windror  Castle. 

“/.  And  also  a resolution  of  thanks  to  the  Lord  Mayor 
and  Lady  Mayoress,  to  Mr.  Passmore  Edwards,  and  other 
friends  who  have  extended  their  hospitality  to  the  members 
of  the  congress. 

“19.  The  congress  places  on  record  a heartfelt  expres- 
sion of  gratitude  to  Almighty  God  for  the  remarkable  har- 
mony and  concord  which  have  characterized  the  meetings  of 
the  assembly,  in  which  so  many  men  and  women  of  varied 
nations,  creeds,  tongues,  and  races  have  gathered  in  closest 
co-operation,  and  for  the  conclusion  of  the  labors  of  the 
congress;  and  expresses  its  firm  and  unshaken  belief  in  the 
ultimate  triumph  of  the  cause  of  peace  and  of  the  principles 
advocated  at  these  meetings.” 

The  fundamental  idea  of  the  congress  is  the  necessity  (i) 
of  diffusing  among  all  people  by  all  means  the  conviction  of 
the  disadvantages  of  war  and  the  great  blessing  of  peace, 
and  (2)  of  rousing  governments  to  the  sense  of  the  superi- 
ority of  international  arbitration  over  war  and  of  the  conse- 


142 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


quent  advisability  and  necessity  of  disarmament.  To  attain 
the  first  aim  the  congress  has  recourse  to  teachers  of  his- 
tory, to  women,  and  to  the  clergy,  with  the  advice  to  the 
latter  to  preach  on  the  evil  of  war  and  the  blessing  of  peace 
every  third  Sunday  in  December.  To  attain  the  second 
object  the  congress  appeals  to  governments  with  the  sug- 
gestion that  they  should  disband  their  armies  and  replace 
war  by  arbitration. 

To  preach  to  men  of  the  evil  of  war  and  the  blessing  of 
peace!  But  the  blessing  of  peace  is  so  well  known  to  men 
that,  ever  since  there  have  been  men  at  all,  their  best  wish 
has  been  expressed  in  the  greeting,  “Peace  be  with  you.’’ 
So  Avhy  preach  about  it? 

Not  only  Christians,  but  pagans,  thousands  of  years  ago, 
all  recognized  the  evil  of  war  and  the  blessing  of  peace.  So 
that  the  recommendation  to  ministers  of  the  Gospel  to 
preach  on  the  evil  of  war  and  the  blessing  of  peace  every 
third  Sunday  in  December  is  quite  superfluous. 

The  Christian  cannot  but  preach  on  that  subject  every 
day  of  his  life.  If  Christians  and  preachers  of  Christianity 
do  not  do  so,  there  must  be  reasons  for  it.  And  until  these 
have  been  removed  no  recommendations  will  be  effective. 
Still  less  effective  will  be  the  recommendations  to  govern- 
ments to  disband  their  armies  and  replace  them  by  inter- 
national boards  of  arbitration.  Governments,  too,  know 
very  well  the  difficulty  and  the  burdensomeness  of  raising 
and  maintaining  forces,  and  if  in  spite  of  that  knowledge 
they  do,  at  the  cost  of  terrible  strain  and  effort,  raise  and 
maintain  forces,  it  is  evident  that  they  cannot  do  otherwise, 
and  the  recommendation  of  the  congress  can  never  change 
it.  But  the  learned  gentlemen  are  uiiAvilling  to  see  that, 
and  keep  hoping  to  find  a political  combination,  through 
which  governments  shall  be  induced  to  limit  their  powers 
themselves. 

“Can  we  get  rid  of  Avar’’?  asks  a learned  Avriter  in  the 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


143 


Revue  des  Revues.  ‘ ‘All  are  agreed  that  if  it  were  to  break 
out  in  Europe,  its  consequences  would  be  like  those  of 
the  great  inroads  of  barbarians.  The  existence  of  whole 
nationalities  would  be  at  stake,  and  therefore  the  war 
would  be  desperate,  bloody,  atrocious. 

“This  consideration,  together  with  the  terrible  engines  of 
destruction  invented  by  modern  science,  retards  the  moment 
of  declaring  war,  and  maintains  the  present  temporary  situa- 
tion, which  might  continue  for  an  indefinite  period,  except 
for  the  fearful  cost  of  maintaining  armaments  which  are 
exhausting  the  European  states  and  threatening  to  reduce 
nations  to  a state  of  misery  hardly  less  than  that  of  war 
itself. 

“Struck  by  this  reflection,  men  of  various  countries  have 
tried  to  find  means  for  preventing,  or  at  least  for  softening, 
the  results  of  the  terrible  slaughter  with  which  we  are 
threatened. 

“Such  are  the  questions  brought  forward  by  the  Peace 
Congress  shortly  to  be  held  in  Rome,  and  the  publication 
of  a pamphlet,  ‘Sur  le  Ddsarmement.’ 

“It  is  unhappily  beyond  doubt  that  with  the  present 
organization  of  the  majority  of  European  states,  isolated 
from  one  another  and  guided  by  distinct  interests,  the  abso- 
lute suppression  of  war  is  an  illusion  with  which  it  would 
be  dangerous  to  cheat  ourselves.  Wiser  rules  and  regula- 
tions imposed  on  these  duels  between  nations  might,  how- 
ever, at  least  limit  its  horrors. 

‘ ‘It  is  equally  chimerical  to  reckon  on  projects  of  disarma- 
ment, the  execution  of  which  is  rendered  almost  impossible 
by  considerations  of  a popular  character  present  to  the  mind 
of  all  our  readers.  [This  probably  means  that  France  can- 
not disband  its  arm)^  before  taking  its  revenge.]  Public 
opinion  is  not  prepared  to  accept  them,  and  moreover,  the 
international  relations  between  different  peoples  are  not 
such  as  to  make  their  acceptance  possible.  Disarmament 


144 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


imposed  on  one  nation  by  another  in  circumstances  threaten- 
ing its  security  would  be  equivalent  to  a declaration  of  war. 

“However,  one  may  admit  that  an  exchange  of  ideas  be- 
tween the  nations  interested  could  aid,  to  a certain  degree, 
in  bringing  about  the  good  understanding  indispensable  to 
any  negotiations,  and  would  render  possible  a considerable 
reduction  of  the  military  expenditure  which  is  crushing  the 
nations  of  Europe  and  greatly  hindering  the  solution  of  thp 
social  question,  which  each  individually  must  solve  on  pain 
of  having  internal  war  as  the  price  for  escaping  it  externally. 

“We  might  at  least  demand  the  reduction  of  the  enor- 
mous expenses  of  war  organized  as  it  is  at  present  with  a 
view  to  the  power  of  invasion  within  twenty-four  hours  and 
a decisive  battle  within  a week  of  the  declaration  of  war. 

“We  ought  to  manage  so  that  states  could  not  make  the 
attack  suddenly  and  invade  each  other’s  territories  within 
twenty-four  hours.” 

This  practical  notion  has  been  put  forth  by  Maxime  du 
Camp,  and  his  article  concludes  with  it. 

The  propositions  of  M.  du  Camp  are  as  follows: 

1.  A diplomatic  congress  to  be  held  every  year. 

2.  No  war  to  be  declared  till  two  months  after  the  inci- 
dent which  provoked  it.  (The  difficulty  here  would  be  to 
decide  precisely  what  incident  did  provoke  the  war,  since 
whenever  war  is  declared  there  are  very  many  such  inci- 
dents, and  one  w'ould  have  to  decide  from  wffiich  to  reckon 
the  two  months’  interval.) 

3.  No  war  to  be  declared  before  it  has  been  submitted  to 
a plebiscitum  of  the  nations  preparing  to  take  part  in  it. 

4.  No  hostilities  to  be  commenced  till  a month  after  the 
official  declaration  of  war. 

“No  war  to  be  declared.  No  hostilities  to  be  com- 
menced,” etc.  But  who  is  to  arrange  that  no  war  is  to  be 
declared?  Who  is  to  compel  people  to  do  this  and  that? 
Who  is  to  force  states  to  delay  their  operations  for  a certain 


75  WITHIN  YOU." 


145 


fixed  time?  All  the  other  states.  But  all  these  others  are 
also  states  which  want  holding  in  check  and  keeping  within 
limits,  and  forcing,  too.  Who  is  to  force  them,  and  how? 
Public  opinion.  But  if  there  is  a public  opinion  which  can 
force  governments  to  delay  their  operations  for  a fixed 
period,  the  same  public  opinion  can  force  governments  not 
to  declare  war  at  all. 

But,  it  will  be  replied,  there  may  be  such  a balance  of 
power,  such  a ponderation  de  forces,  as  would  lead  states  to 
hold  back  of  their  own  accord.  Well,  that  has  been  tried 
and  is  being  tried  even  now.  The  Holy  Alliance  was  noth- 
ing but  that,  the  League  of  Peace  was  another  attempt  at 
the  same  thing,  and  so  on. 

But,  it  will  be  answered,  suppose  all  were  agreed.  If  all 
were  agreed  there  would  be  no  more  war  certainly,  and  no 
need  for  arbitration  either. 

“A  court  of  arbitration!  Arbitration  shall  replace  war. 
Questions  shall  be  decided  by  a court  of  arbitration.  The 
Alabama  question  was  decided  by  a court  of  arbitration, 
and  the  question  of  the  Caroline  Islands  was  submitted  to 
the  decision  of  the  Pope.  Switzerland,  Belgium,  Denmark, 
and  Holland  have  all  declared  that  they  prefer  arbitration 
to  war.” 

I dare  say  Monaco  has  expressed  the  same  preference. 
The  only  unfortunate  thing  is  that  Germany,  Russia,  Aus- 
tria, and  France  have  not  so  far  shown  the  same  inclination. 
It  is  amazing  how  men  can  deceive  themselves  when  they 
find  it  necessary!  Governments  consent  to  decide  their 
disagreements  by  arbitration  and  to  disband  their  armies! 
The  differences  between  Russia  and  Poland,  between  Eng- 
land and  Ireland,  between  Austria  and  Bohemia,  between 
Turkey  and  the  Slavonic  states,  between  France  and  Ger- 
many, to  be  soothed  away  by  amiable  conciliation! 

One  might  as  well  suggest  to  merchants  and  bankers  that 
they  should  sell  nothing  for  a greater  price  than  they  gave 


146 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


for  it,  should  undertake  the  distribution  of  wealth  for  no 
profit,  and  should  abolish  money,  as  it  would  thus  be  ren- 
dered unnecessary. 

But  since  commercial  and  banking  operations  consist  in 
nothing  but  selling  for  more  than  the  cost  price,  this  would 
be  equivalent  to  an  invitation  to  suppress  themselves.  It 
is  the  same  in  regard  to  governments.  To  suggest  to 
governments  that  they  should  not  have  recourse  to  violence, 
but  should  decide  their  misunderstandings  in  accordance 
with  equity,  is  inviting  them  to  abolish  themselves  as  rulers, 
and  that  no  government  can  ever  consent  to  do. 

The  learned  men  form  societies  (there  are  more  than  a 
hundred  such  societies),  assemble  in  congresses  (such  as 
those  recently  held  in  London  and  Paris,  and  shortly  to  be 
held  in  Rome),  deliver  addresses,  eat  public  dinners  and 
make  speeches,  publish  journals,  and  prove  by  every  means 
possible  that  the  nations  forced  to  support  millions  of  troops 
are  strained  to  the  furthest  limits  of  their  endurance,  that 
the  maintenance  of  these  huge  armed  forces  is  in  opposition 
to  all  the  aims,  the  interests,  and  the  wishes  of  the  people, 
and  that  it  is  possible,  moreover,  by  writing  numerous 
papers,  and  uttering  a great  many  words,  to  bring  all  men 
into  agreement  and  to  arrange  so  that  they  shall  have  no 
antagonistic  interests,  and  then  there  will  be  no  more  war. 

When  I was  a little  boy  they  told  me  if  I wanted  to  catch 
a bird  I must  put  salt  on  its  tail.  I ran  after  the  birds  with 
the  salt  in  my  hand,  but  I soon  convinced  myself  that  if  I 
could  put  salt  on  a bird’s  tail,  I could  catch  it,  and  realized 
that  I had  been  hoaxed. 

People  ought  to  realize  the  same  fact  when  they  read 
books  and  articles  on  arbitration  and  disarmament.  . 

If  one  could  put  salt  on  a bird’s  tail,  it  would  be  because 
it  could  not  fly  and  there  would  be  no  difficulty  in  catching 
it.  If  the  bird  had  wings  and  did  not  want  to  be  caught,  it 
would  not  let  one  put  salt  on  its  tail,  because  the  specialty 


75  WITHIN  YOU." 


147 


of  a bird  is  to  fly.  In  precisely  the  same  way  the  specialty 
of  government  is  not  to  obey,  but  to  enforce  obedience. 
And  a government  is  only  a government  so  long  as  it  can 
make  itself  obeyed,  and  therefore  it  always  strives  for  that 
and  will  never  willingly  abandon  its  power.  But  since  it  is 
on  the  army  that  the  power  of  government  rests,  it  will  never 
give  up  the  army,  and  the  use  of  the  army  in  war. 

The  error  arises  from  the  learned  jurists  deceiving  them- 
selves and  others,  by  asserting  that  government  is  not  what 
it  really  is,  one  set  of  men  banded  together  to  oppress 
another  set  of  men,  but,  as  shown  by  science,  is  the  repre- 
sentation of  the  citizens  in  their  collective  capacity.  They 
have  so  long  been  persuading  other  people  of  this  that  at 
last  they  have  persuaded  themselves  of  it;  and  thus  they 
often  seriously  suppose  that  government  can  be  bound  by 
considerations  of  justice.  But  history  shows  that  from 
Caesar  to  Napoleon,  and  from  Napoleon  to  Bismarck, 
government  is  in  its  essence  always  a force  acting  in  viola- 
tion of  justice,  and  that  it  cannot  be  otherwise.  Justice  can 
have  no  binding  force  on  a ruler  or  rulers  who  keep  men, 
deluded  and  drilled  in  readiness  for  acts  of  violence — sol- 
diers, and  by  means  of  them  control  others.  And  so  govern- 
ments can  never  be  brought  to  consent  to  diminish  the 
number  of  these  drilled  slaves,  who  constitute  their  whole 
power  and  importance. 

Such  is  the  attitude  of  certain  learned  men  to  the  contra- 
diction under  which  our  society  is  being  crushed,  and  such 
are  their  methods  of  solving  it.  Tell  these  people  that  the 
whole  matter  rests  on  the  personal  attitude  of  each  man  to 
the  moral  and  religious  question  put  nowadays  to  everyone, 
the  question,  that  is,  whether  it  is  lawful  or  unlawful  for 
him  to  take  his  share  of  military  service,  and  these  learned 
gentlemen  will  shrug  their  shoulders  and  not  condescend  to 
listen  or  to  answer  you.  The  solution  of  the  question  in 
their  idea  is  to  be  found  in  reading  addresses,  writing  books, 


148 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  COD 


electing  presidents,  vice-presidents,  and  secretaries,  and 
meeting  and  speaking  first  in  one  town  and  then  in  another. 
From  all  this  speechifying  and  writing  it  will  come  to  pass, 
according  to  their  notions,  that  governments  will  cease  to 
levy  the  soldiers,  on  whom  their  whole  strength  depends, 
will  listen  to  their  discourses,  and  will  disband  their  forces, 
leaving  themselves  without  any  defense,  not  only  against 
their  neighbors,  but  also  against  their  own  subjects.  As 
though  a band  of  brigands,  who  have  some  unarmed  travel- 
ers bound  and  ready  to  be  plundered,  should  be  so  touched 
by  their  complaints  of  the  pain  caused  by  the  cords  they  are 
fastened  with  as  to  let  them  go  again. 

Still  there  are  people  who  believe  in  this,  busy  themselves 
over  peace  congresses,  read  addresses,  and  write  books. 
And  governments,  we  may  be  quite  sure,  express  their  sym- 
pathy and  make  a show  of  encouraging  them.  In  the  same 
way  they  pretend  to  support  temperance  societies,  while 
they  are  living  principally  on  the  drunkenness  of  the  people; 
and  pretend  to  encourage  education,  when  their  whole 
strength  is  based  on  ignorance;  and  to  support  constitu- 
tional freedom,  when  their  strength  rests  on  the  absence  of 
freedom;  and  to  be  anxious  for  the  improvement  of  the 
condition  of  the  working  classes,  when  their  very  existence 
depends  on  their  oppression;  and  to  support  Christianity, 
when  Christianity  destroys  all  government. 

To  be  able  to  do  this  they  have  long  ago  elaborated 
methods  encouraging  temperance,  which  cannot  suppress 
drunkenness;  methods  of  supporting  education,  which  not 
only  fail  to  prevent  ignorance,  but  even  increase  it; 
methods  of  aiming  at  freedom  and  constitutionalism,  which 
are  no  hindrance  to  despotism ; methods  of  protecting  the 
working  classes,  which  will  not  free  them  from  slavery;  and 
a Christianity,  too,  they  have  elaborated,  which  does  not 
destroy,  but  supports  governments. 

Now  there  is  something  more  for  the  government  to 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


149 


encourage — peace.  The  sovereigns,  who  nowadays  take 
counsel  with  their  ministers,  decide  by  their  will  alone 
whether  the  butchery  of  millions  is  to  be  begun  this  year  or 
next.  They  know  very  well  that  all  these  discourses  upon 
peace  will  not  hinder  them  from  sending  millions  of  men  to 
butchery  when  it  seems  good  to  them.  They  listen  even 
with  satisfaction  to  these  discourses,  encourage  them,  and 
take  part  in  them. 

All  this,  far  from  being  detrimental,  is  even  of  service  to 
governments,  by  turning  people’s  attention  from  the  most 
important  and  pressing  question:  Ought  or  ought  not  each 
man  called  upon  for  military  service  to  submit  to  serve  in 
the  army? 

“Peace  will  soon  be  arranged,  thanks  to  alliances  and 
congresses,  to  books  and  pamphlets;  meantime  go  and  put 
on  your  uniform,  and  prepare  to  cause  suffering  and  to 
endure  it  for  our  benefit,’’  is  the  government’s  line  of  argu- 
ment. And  the  learned  gentlemen  who  get  up  congresses 
and  write  articles  are  in  perfect  agreement  with  it. 

This  is  the  attitude  of  one  set  of  thinkers.  And  since  it 
is  that  most  beneficial  to  governments,  it  is  also  the  most 
encouraged  by  all  intelligent  governments. 

Another  attitude  to  war  has  something  tragical  in  it. 
There  are  men  who  maintain  that  the  love  for  peace  and  the 
inevitability  of  war  form  a hideous  contradiction,  and  that 
such  is  the  fate  of  man.  These  are  mostly  gifted  and  sensi- 
tive men,  who  see  and  realize  all  the  horror  and  imbecility 
and  cruelty  of  war,  but  through  some  strange  perversion  of 
mind  neither  see  nor  seek  to  find  any  way  out  of  this  posi- 
tion, and  seem  to  take  pleasure  in  teasing  the  wound  by 
dwelling  on  the  desperate  position  of  humanity.  A notable 
example  of  such  an  attitude  to  war  is  to  be  found  in  the 
celebrated  French  writer  Guy  de  Maupassant.  Looking 
from  his  yacht  at  the  drill  and  firing  practice  of  the  French 
soldiers  the  following  reflections  occur  to  him: 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


ISO 

“When  I think  only  of  this  word  war,  a kind  of  terror 
seizes  upon  me,  as  though  I were  listening  to  some  tale  of 
sorcery,  of  the  Inquisition,  some  long  past,  remote  abomi- 
nation, monstrous,  unnatural. 

“When  cannibalism  is  spoken  of,  we  smile  with  pride, 
proclaiming  our  superiority  to  these  savages.  Which  are 
the  savages,  the  real  savages?  Those  who  fight  to  eat  the 
conquered,  or  those  who  fight  to  kill,  for  nothing  but  to 
kill? 

“The  young  recruits,  moving  about  in  lines  yonder,  are 
destined  to  death  like  the  flocks  of  sheep  driven  by  the 
butcher  along  the  road.  They  will  fall  in  some  plain  with 
a saber  cut  in  the  head,  or  a bullet  through  the  breast.  And 
these  are  young  men  who  might  work,  be  productive  and 
useful.  Their  fathers  are  old  and  poor.  Their  mothers, 
who  have  loved  them  for  twenty  years,  worshiped  them  as 
none  but  mothers  can,  will  learn  in  six  months’  time,  or  a 
year  perhaps,  that  their  son,  their  boy,  the  big  boy  reared 
with  so  much  labor,  so  much  expense,  so  much  love,  has 
been  thrown  in  a hole  like  some  dead  dog,  after  being  dis- 
emboweled by  a bullet,  and  trampled,  crushed,  to  a mass  of 
pulp  by  the  charges  of  cavalry.  Why  have  they  killed  her 
boy,  her  handsome  boy,  her  one  hope,  her  pride,  her  life? 
She  does  not  know.  Ah,  why? 

“War!  fighting!  slaughter!  massacres  of  men!  And 
we  have  now,  in  our  century,  with  our  civilization,  with  the 
spread  of  science,  and  the  degree  of  philosophy  which  the 
genius  of  man  is  supposed  to  have  attained,  schools  for 
training  to  kill,  to  kill  very  far  off,  to  perfection,  great  num- 
bers at  once,  to  kill  poor  devils  of  innocent  men  with  fam- 
ilies and  without  any  kind  of  trial. 

“And  what  is  most  bewildering  is  that  the  people  do  not  rise 
against  their  govertwients.  For  what  difference  is  there  be- 
tween moiiarchies  and  republics  ? The  most  bewildering  thing 
is  that  the  whole  of  society  is  not  in  revolt  at  the  word  war," 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


151 

"Ah ! we  shall  always  live  under  the  burden  of  the  ancient 
and  odious  customs,  the  criminal  prejudices,  the  ferocious 
ideas  of  our  barbarous  ancestors,  for  we  are  beasts,  and 
beasts  we  shall  remain,  dominated  by  instinct  and  changed 
by  nothing.  Would  not  any  other  man  than  Victor  Hugo 
have  been  exiled  for  that  mighty  cry  of  deliverance  and 
truth?  ‘To-day  force  is  called  violence,  and  is  being 
brought  to  judgment ; war  has  been  put  on  its  trial.  At  the 
plea  of  the  human  race,  civilization  arraigns  warfare,  and 
draws  up  the  great  list  of  crimes  laid  at  the  charge  of  con- 
querors and  generals.  The  nations  are  coming  to  under- 
stand that  the  magnitude  of  a crime  cannot  be  its  extenua- 
tion; that  if  killing  is  a crime,  killing  many  can  be  no 
extenuating  circumstance;  that  if  robbery  is  disgraceful, 
invasion  cannot  be  glorious.  Ah!  let  us  proclaim  these 
absolute  truths;  let  us  dishonor  war!’ 

"Vain  wrath,’’  continues  Maupassant,  "a  poet’s  indigna- 
tion. War  is  held  in  more  veneration  than  ever. 

"A  skilled  proficient  in  that  line,  a slaughterer  of  genius. 
Von  Moltke,  in  reply  to  the  peace  delegates,  once  uttered 
these  strange  words: 

" ‘War  is  holy,  war  is  ordained  of  God.  It  is  one  of  the 
most  sacred  laws  of  the  world.  It  maintains  among  men  all 
the  great  and  noble  sentiments — honor,  devotion,  virtue, 
and  courage,  and  saves  them  in  short  from  falling  into  the 
most  hideous  materialism.’ 

"So,  then,  bringing  millions  of  men  together  into 
herds,  marching  by  day  and  by  night  without  rest, 
thinking  of  nothing,  studying  nothing,  learning  nothing, 
reading  nothing,  being  useful  to  no  one,  wallowing  in  filth, 
sleeping  in  mud,  living  like  brutes  in  a continual  state  of 
stupefaction,  sacking  towns,  burning  villages,  ruining  whole 
populations,  then  meeting  another  mass  of  human  flesh,  fall- 
ing upon  them,  making  pools  of  blood,  and  plains  of  flesh 
mixed  with  trodden  mire  and  red  with  heaps  of  corpses. 


152  " THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 

having  your  arms  or  legs  carried  off,  your  brains  blown  out 
for  no  advantage  to  anyone,  and  dying  in  some  corner  of  a 
field  while  your  old  parents,  your  wife  and  children  are 
perishing  of  hunger — that  is  what  is  meant  by  not  falling 
into  the  most  hideous  materialism! 

“Warriors  are  the  scourge  of  the  world.  We  struggle 
against  nature  and  ignorance  and  obstacles  of  all  kinds  to 
make  our  wretched  life  less  hard.  Learned  men — bene- 
factors of  all — spend  their  lives  in  working,  in  seeking  what 
can  aid,  what  be  of  use,  what  can  alleviate  the  lot  of  their 
fellows.  They  devote  themselves  unsparingly  to  their  task 
of  usefulness,  making  one  discovery  after  another,  enlarging 
the  sphere  of  human  intelligence,  extending  the  bounds  of 
science,  adding  each  day  some  new  store  to  the  sum  of 
knowledge,  gaining  each  day  prosperity,  ease,  strength  for 
their  country. 

“War  breaks  out.  In  six  months  the  generals  have 
destroyed  the  work  of  twenty  years  of  effort,  of  patience, 
and  of  genius. 

“That  is  what  is  meant  by  not  falling  into  the  most 
hideous  materialism. 

“We  have  seen  it,  war.  We  have  seen  men  turned  to 
brutes,  frenzied,  killing  for  fun,  for  terror,  for  bravado,  for 
ostentation.  Then  when  right  is  no  more,  law  is  dead, 
every  notion  of  justice  has  disappeared.  We  have  seen  men 
shoot  innocent  creatures  found  on  the  road,  and  suspected 
because  they  were  afraid.  We  have  seen  them  kill  dogs 
chained  at  their  masters’  doors  to  try  their  new  revolvers, 
we  have  seen  them  fire  on  cows  lying  in  a field  for  no  rea- 
son whatever,  simply  for  the  sake  of  shooting,  for  a joke. 

“That  is  what  is  meant  by  not  falling  into  the  most 
hideous  materialism. 

“Going  into  a country,  cutting  the  man’s  throat  who 
defends  his  house  because  he  wears  a blouse  and  has  not  a 
military  cap  on  his  head,  burning  the  dwellings  of  wretched 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


153 


beings  who  have  nothing  to  eat,  breaking  furniture  and  steal- 
ing goods,  drinking  the  wine  found  in  the  cellars,  violating 
the  women  in  the  streets,  burning  thousands  of  francs’ 
worth  of  powder,  and  leaving  misery  and  cholera  in  one’s 
track — 

“That  is  what  is  meant  by  not  falling  into  the  most 
hideous  materialism. 

“What  have  they  done,  those  warriors,  that  proves  the 
least  intelligence?  Nothing.  What  have  they  invented? 
Cannons  and  muskets.  That  is  all. 

“What  remains  to  us  from  Greece?  Books  and  statues. 
Is  Greece  great  from  her  conquests  or  her  creations? 

“Was  it  the  invasions  of  the  Persians  which  saved  Greece 
from  falling  into  the  most  hideous  materialism? 

“Were  the  invasions  of  the  barbarians  what  saved  and 
regenerated  Rome? 

“Was  it  Napoleon  I.  who  carried  forward  the  great  intel- 
lectual movement  started  by  the  philosophers  of  the  end  of 
last  century? 

“Yes,  indeed,  since  government  assumes  the  right  of  anni- 
hilating peoples  thus,  there  is  nothing  surprising  in  the  fact 
that  the  peoples  assume  the  right  of  annihilating  govern- 
ments. 

“They  defend  themselves.  They  are  right.  No  one  has 
an  absolute  right  to  govern  others.  It  ought  only  to  be 
done  for  the  benefit  of  those  who  are  governed.  And  it  is 
as  much  the  duty  of  anyone  who  governs  to  avoid  war  as  it 
is  the  duty  of  a captain  of  a ship  to  avoid  shipwreck. 

“When  a captain  has  let  his  ship  come  to  ruin,  he  is 
judged  and  condemned,  if  he  is  found  guilty  of  negligence 
or  even  incapacity. 

“Why  should  not  the  government  be  put  on  its  trial 
after  every  declaration  of  war?  If  the  people  understood 
that,  if  they  themselves  passed  judgment  on  murderous  govern- 
ments, if  they  refused  to  let  themselves  be  killed  for  nothing,  if 


154 


“ 'I'HE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


they  would  only  turn  their  arms  against  those  who  have  given 
them  to  them  for  massacre,  on  that  day  war  would  be  no  more. 
But  that  day  will  never  come.”  * 

The  author  sees  all  the  horror  of  war.  He  sees  that  it  is 
caused  by  governments  forcing  men  by  deception  to  go  out 
to  slaughter  and  be  slain  without  any  advantage  to  them- 
selves. And  he  sees,  too,  that  the  men  who  make  up  the 
armies  could  turn  their  arms  against  th^  governments  and 
bring  them  to  judgment.  But  he  thinks  that  that  will 
never  come  to  pass,  and  that  there  is,  therefore,  no  escape 
from  the  present  position.  “I  think  war  is  terrible,  but  that 
it  is  inevitable;  that  compulsory  military  service  is  as  inevi- 
table as  death,  and  that  since  government  will  always  desire 
it,  war  will  always  exist.” 

So  writes  this  talented  and  sincere  writer,  who  is  endowed 
with  that  power  of  penetrating  to  the  innermost  core  of  the 
subjects  which  is  the  essence  of  the  poetic  faculty.  He 
brings  before  us  all  the  cruelty  of  the  inconsistency  between 
men’s  moral  sense  and  their  actions,  but  without  trying  to 
remove  it;  seems  to  admit  that  this  inconsistency  must  exist 
and  that  it  is  the  poetic  tragedy  of  life. 

Another  no  less  gifted  writer,  Edouard  Rod,  paints  in  still 
more  vivid  colors  the  cruelty  and  madness  of  the  present 
state  of  things.  He  too  only  aims  at  presenting  its  tragic 
features,  without  suggesting  or  forseeing  any  issue  from  the 
position. 

‘‘What  is  the  good  of  doing  anything?  What  is  the  good 
of  undertaking  any  enterprise?  And  how  are  we  to  love 
men  in  these  troubled  times  when  every  fresh  day  is  a 
menace  of  danger?  . . . All  we  have  begun,  the  plans  we  are 
developing,  our  schemes  of  work,  the  little  good  we  may 
have  been  able  to  do,  will  it  not  all  be  swept  away  by  the 
tempest  that  is  in  preparation?  . . . Everywhere  the  earth  is 


■^Surl’Eau,”  pp.  71-80. 


IS  IVITHIN  YOU."  155 

shaking  under  our  feet  and  storm-clouds  are  gathering  on 
our  horizon  which  will  have  no  pity  on  us. 

“Ah!  if  all  we  had  to  dread  were  the  revolution  which 
is  held  up  as  a specter  to  terrify  us ! Since  I cannot  imagine 
a society  more  detestable  than  ours,  I feel  more  skeptical 
than  alarmed  in  regard  to  that  which  will  replace  it.  If  I 
should  have  to  suffer  from  the  change,  I should  be  consoled 
by  thinking  that  the  executioners  of  that  day  were  the  vic- 
tims of  the  previous  time,  and  the  hope  of  something  better 
would  help  us  to  endure  the  worst.  But  it  is  not  that  remote 
peril  which  frightens  me.  I see  another  danger,  nearer  and 
far  more  cruel;  more  cruel  because  there  is  no  excuse  for 
it,  because  it  is  absurd,  because  it  can  lead  to  no  good. 
Every  day  one  balances  the  chances  of  war  on  the  morrow, 
every  day  they  become  more  merciless. 

“The  imagination  revolts  before  the  catastrophe  which  is 
coming  at  the  end  of  our  century  as  the  goal  of  the  progress 
of  our  era,  and  yet  we  must  get  used  to  facing  it.  For 
twenty  years  past  every  resource  of  science  has  been  ex- 
hausted in  the  invention  of  engines  of  destruction,  and  soon 
a few  charges  of  cannon  will  suffice  to  annihilate  a whole 
army.  No  longer  a few  thousands  of  poor  devils,  who  were 
paid  a price  for  their  blood,  are  kept  under  arms,  but  whole 
nations  are  under  arms  to  cut  each  other’s  throats.  They 
are  robbed  of  their  time  now  (by  compulsory  service)  that 
they  may  be  robbed  of  their  lives  later.  To  prepare  them 
for  the  work  of  massacre,  their  hatred  is  kindled  by  per- 
suading them  that  they  are  hated.  And  peaceable  men  let 
themselves  be  played  on  thus  and  go  and  fall  on  one  another 
with  the  ferocity  of  wild  beasts;  furious  troops  of  peaceful 
citizens  taking  up  arms  at  an  empty  word  of  command,  for 
some  ridiculous  question  of  frontiers  or  colonial  trade 
interests — Heaven  only  knows  what.  . . They  will  go  like 
sheep  to  the  slaughter,  knowing  all  the  while  where  they  are 
going,  knowing  that  they  are  leaving  their  wives,  knowing 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


156 

that  their  children  will  want  for  food,  full  of  misgivings,  yet 
intoxicated  by  the  fine-sounding  lies  that  are  dinned  into 
their  ears.  They  will  march  without  revolt, passive,  resigned — 
though  the  numbers  and  the  strength  are  theirs,  and  they  might, 
if  they  htew  how  to  co-operate  together,  establish  the  reign  of 
good  sense  and  fraternity,  instead  of  the  barbarous  trickery 
of  diplomacy.  They  will  march  to  battle  so  deluded,  so 
duped,  that  they  will  believe  slaughter  to  be  a duty,  and  will 
ask  the  benediction  of  God  on  their  lust  for  blood.  They 
will  march  to  battle  trampling  underfoot  the  harvests  they 
have  sown,  burning  the  towns  they  have  built — with  songs 
of  triumph,  festive  music,  and  cries  of  jubilation.  And 
their  sons  will  raise  statues  to  those  who  have  done  most  in 
their  slaughter. 

“The  destiny  of  a whole  generation  depends  on  the  hour 
in  which  some  ill-fated  politician  may  give  the  signal  that 
will  be  followed.  We  know  that  the  best  of  us  will  be  cut 
down  and  our  work  will  be  destroyed  in  embryo.  We  know 
it  and  tremble  with  rage,  but  we  caji  do  nothing.  We  are  held 
fast  in  the  toils  of  officialdom  and  red  tape,  and  too  rude  a 
shock  would  be  needed  to  set  us  free.  We  are  enslaved  by 
the  laws  we  set  up  for  our  protection,  which  have  become 
our  oppression.  We  are  but  the  tools  of  that  autocratic 
abstraction  the  state,  which  enslaves  each  mdividual  in  the 
name  of  the  will  of  all,  who  tuould  all,  taken  individually,  desire 
exactly  the  opposite  of  what  they  will  be  made  to  do. 

“And  if  it  were  only  a generation  that  must  be  sacrificed! 
But  there  are  graver  interests  at  stake. 

“The  paid  politicians,  the  ambitious  statesmen,  who 
exploit  the  evil  passions  of  the  populace,  and  the  imbeciles 
who  are  deluded  by  fine-sounding  phrases,  have  so  embit- 
tered national  feuds  that  the  existence  of  a Avhole  race  will 
be  at  stake  in  the  war  of  the  morrow.  One  of  the  elements 
that  constitute  the  modern  world  is  threatened,  the  con- 
quered people  will  be  wiped  out  of  existence,  and  which- 


/S  WITHIN  YOU. 


157 


ever  it  may  be,  we  shall  see  a moral  force  annihilated,  as  if 
there  were  too  many  forces  to  work  for  good — we  shall  have 
a new  Europe  formed  on  foundations  so  unjust,  so  brutal, 
so  sanguinary,  stained  with  so  monstrous  a crime,  that  it 
cannot  but  be  worse  than  the  Europe  of  to-day — more 
iniquitous,  more  barbarous,  more  violent. 

“Thus  one  feels  crushed  under  the  weight  of  an  immense 
discouragement.  We  are  struggling  in  a cul  de  sac  with 
muskets  aimed  at  us  from  the  housetops.  Our  labor  is  like 
that  of  sailors  executing  their  last  task  as  the  ship  begins  to 
sink.  Our  pleasures  are  those  of  the  condemned  victim, 
who  is  offered  his  choice  of  dainties  a quarter  of  an  hour 
before  his  execution.  Thought  is  paralyzed  by  anguish, 
and  the  most  it  is  capable  of  is  to  calculate — interpreting  the 
vague  phrases  of  ministers,  spelling  out  the  sense  of  the 
speeches  of  sovereigns,  and  ruminating  on  the  words  attrib- 
uted to  diplomatists  reported  on  the  uncertain  authority  of 
the  newspapers — whether  it  is  to  be  to-morrow  or  the  day 
after,  this  year  or  the  next,  that  we  are  to  be  murdered. 
So  that  one  might  seek  in  vain  in  history  an  epoch  more 
insecure,  more  crushed  under  the  weight  of  suffering.’’* 

Here  it  is  pointed  out  that  the  force  is  in  the  hands  of 
those  who  work  their  own  destruction,  in  the  hands  of  the 
individual  men  who  make  up  the  masses;  it  is  pointed  out 
that  the  source  of  the  evil  is  the  government.  It  would 
seem  evident  that  the  contradiction  between  life  and  con- 
science had  reached  the  limit  beyond  which  it  cannot  go, 
and  after  reaching  this  limit  some  solution  of  it  must  be 
found. 

But  the  author  does  not  think  so.  He  sees  in  this  the 
tragedy  of  human  life,  and  after  depicting  all  the  horror  of 
the  position  he  concludes  that  human  life  must  be  spent  in 
the  midst  of  this  horror. 


“Le  Sens  de  la  Vie,”  pp.  208-13. 


158 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


So  much  for  the  attitude  to  war  of  those  who  regard  it  as 
something  tragic  and  fated  by  destiny. 

The  third  category  consists  of  men  who  have  lost  all  con- 
science and,  consequently,  all  common  sense  and  feeling  of 
humanity. 

To  this  category  belongs  Moltke,  whose  opinion  has  been 
quoted  above  by  Maupassant,  and  the  majority  of  military 
men,  who  have  been  educated  in  this  cruel  superstition,  live 
by  it,  and  consequently  are  often  in  all  simplicity  convinced 
that  war  is  not  only  an  inevitable,  but  even  a necessary  and 
beneficial  thing.  This  is  also  the  view  of  some  civilians,  so- 
called  educated  and  cultivated  people. 

Here  is  what  the  celebrated  academician  Camille  Doucet 
writes  in  reply  to  the  editor  of  the  Revue  des  Revues,  where 
several  letters  on  war  were  published  together: 

“Dear  Sir:  When  you  ask  the  least  warlike  of  acade- 
micians whether  he  is  a partisan  of  war,  his  answer  is  known 
beforehand. 

“Alas!  sir,  you  yourself  speak  of  the  pacific  ideal  inspir- 
ing your  generous  compatriots  as  a dream. 

“During  my  life  I have  heard  a great  many  good  people 
protest  against  this  frightful  custom  of  international  butchery, 
which  all  admit  and  deplore ; but  how  is  it  to  be  remedied? 

“Often,  too,  there  have  been  attempts  to  suppress  duel- 
ing; one  would  fancy  that  seemed  an  easy  task:  but  not  at 
all!  All  that  has  been  done  hitherto  with  that  noble  object 
has  never  been  and  never  will  be  of  use. 

“All  the  congresses  of  both  hemispheres  may  vote  against 
war,  and  against  dueling  too,  but  above  all  arbitrations, 
conventions,  and  legislations  there  will  always  be  the  per- 
sonal honor  of  individual  men,  which  has  always  demanded 
dueling,  and  the  interests  of  nations,  which  will  always 
demand  war. 

“I  wish  none  the  less  from  the  depths  of  my  heart  that 


IS  WITHIN  YOU: 


159 


the  Congress  of  Universal  Peace  may  succeed  at  last  in  its 
very  honorable  and  difficult  enterprise. 

“I  am,  dear  sir,  etc., 

“Camille  Doucet.” 

The  upshot  of  this  is  that  personal  honor  requires  men  to 
fight,  and  the  interests  of  nations  require  them  to  ruin  and 
exterminate  each  other.  As  for  the  efforts  to  abolish  war, 
they  call  for  nothing  but  a smile. 

The  opinion  of  another  well-known  academician,  Jules 
Claretie,  is  of  the  same  kind. 

“Dear  Sir  [he  writes]:  For  a man  of  sense  there  can 
be  but  one  opinion  on  the  subject  of  peace  and  war. 

“Humanity  is  created  to  live,  to  live  free,  to  perfect  and 
ameliorate  its  fate  by  peaceful  labor.  The  general  harmony 
preached  by  the  Universal  Peace  Congress  is  but  a dream 
perhaps,  but  at  least  it  is  the  fairest  of  all  dreams.  Man  is 
always  looking  toward  the  Promised  Land,  and  there  the 
harvests  are  to  ripen  with  no  fear  of  their  being  torn  up  by 

shells  or  crushed  by  cannon  wheels.  . . But!  Ah!  but 

since  philosophers  and  philanthropists  are  not  the  controll- 
ing powers,  it  is  well  for  our  soldiers  to  guard  our  frontier 
and  homes,  and  their  arms,  skillfully  used,  are  perhaps  the 
surest  guarantee  of  the  peace  we  all  love. 

“Peace  is  a gift  only  granted  to  the  strong  and  the  reso- 
lute. 

“I  am,  dear  sir,  etc., 

“Jules  Claretie.” 

The  upshot  of  this  letter  is  that  there  is  no  harm  in  talk- 
ing about  what  no  one  intends  or  feels  obliged  to  do.  But 
when  it  comes  to  practice,  we  must  fight. 

And  here  now  is  the  view  lately  expressed  by  the  most 
popular  novelist  in  Europe,  Emile  Zola: 


i6o 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


“I  regard  war  as  a fatal  necessity,  which  appears  inevita- 
ble for  us  from  its  close  connection  with  human  nature  and 
the  whole  constitution  of  the  world.  I should  wish  that  war 
could  be  put  off  for  the  longest  possible  time.  Nevertheless, 
the  moment  will  come  when  we  shall  be  forced  to  go  to  war. 

I am  considering  it  at  this  moment  from  the  standpoint  of 
universal  humanity,  and  making  no  reference  to  our  mis- 
understanding with  Germany — a most  trivial  incident  in  the 
history  of  mankind.  I say  that  war  is  necessary  and  bene- 
ficial, since  it  seems  one  of  the  conditions  of  existence  for 
humanity.  War  confronts  us  everywhere,  not  only  war  be- 
tween different  races  and  peoples,  but  war  too,  in  private 
and  family  life.  It  seems  one  of  the  principal  elements  of 
progress,  and  every  step  in  advance  that  humanity  has  taken 
hitherto  has  been  attended  by  bloodshed. 

“Men  have  talked,  and  still  talk,  of  disarmament,  while 
disarmament  is  something  impossible,  to  which,  even  if  it 
were  possible,  we  ought  not  to  consent.  I am  convinced 
that  a general  disarmament  throughout  the  world  would 
involve  something  like  a moral  decadence,  which  would 
show  itself  in  general  feebleness,  and  would  hinder  the  pro- 
gressive advancement  of  humanity.  A warlike  nation  has 
always  been  strong  and  flourishing.  The  art  of  war  has  led 
to  the  development  of  all  the  other  arts.  History  bears  wit- 
ness to  it.  So  in  Athens  and  in  Rome,  commerce,  manu- 
factures, and  literature  never  attained  so  high  a point  of 
development  as  when  those  cities  were  masters  of  the  whole 
world  by  force  of  arms.  To  take  an  example  from  times 
nearer  our  own,  we  may  recall  the  age  of  Louis  XIV.  The 
wars  of  the  Grand  Monarque  were  not  only  no  hindrance 
to  the  progress  of  the  arts  and  sciences,  but  even,  on  the 
contrary,  seem  to  have  promoted  and  favored  their  develop- 
ment.’’ 

So  war  is  a beneficial  thing! 

But  the  best  expression  of  this  attitude  is  the  view  of  the 


TS  WITHm  YOU." 


i6i 

most  gifted  of  the  writers  of  this  school,  the  academician  de 
Vogiie.  This  is  what  he  writes  in  an  article  on  the  Military 
Section  of  the  Exhibition  of  1889: 

“On  the  Esplanade  des  Invalides,  among  the  exotic  and 
colonial  encampments,  a building  in  a more  severe  style 
overawes  the  picturesque  bazaar;  all  these  fragments  of  the 
globe  have  come  to  gather  round  the  Palace  of  War,  and  in 
turn  our  guests  mount  guard  submissively  before  the  mother 
building,  but  for  whom  they  would  not  be  here.  Fine  sub- 
ject for  the  antithesis  of  rhetoric,  of  humanitarians  who 
could  not  fail  to  whimper  over  this  juxtaposition,  and  to  say 
that  ‘ceci  tuera  cela,'  * that  the  union  of  the  nations  through 
science  and  labor  will  overcome  the  instinct  of  war.  Let  us 
leave  them  to  cherish  the  chimera  of  a golden  age,  which 
would  soon  become,  if  it  could  be  realized,  an  age  of  mud. 
All  history  teaches  us  that  the  one  is  created  for  the  other, 
that  blood  is  needed  to  hasten  and  cement  the  union  of  the 
nations.  Natural  science  has  ratified  in  our  day  the  mys- 
terious law  revealed  to  Joseph  de  Maistre  by  the  intuition 
of  his  genius  and  by  meditation  on  fundamental  truths ; he 
saw  the  world  redeeming  itself  from  hereditary  degenera- 
tions by  sacrifice;  science  shows  it  advancing  to  perfection 
through  struggle  and  violent  selection ; there  is  the  state- 
ment of  the  same  law  in  both,  expressed  in  different 
formulas.  The  statement  is  disagreeable,  no  doubt;  but  the 
laws  of  the  world  are  not  made  for  our  pleasure,  they  are 
made  for  our  progress.  Let  us  enter  this  inevitable,  neces- 
sary palace  of  war;  we  shall  be  able  to  observe  there  how 
the  most  tenacious  of  our  instincts,  without  losing  any  of  its 
vigor,  is  transformed  and  adapted  to  the  varying  exigencies 
of  historical  epochs.’’ 

M.  de  Vogiid  finds  the  necessity  for  war,  according  to  his 
views,  well  expressed  by  the  two  great  writers,  Joseph  de 

* Phrase  quoted  from  Victor-Hugo,  “ Notre- Dame  de  Paris.” 


i62 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


Maistre  and  Darwin,  whose  statements  he  likes  so  much 
that  he  quotes  them  again. 

“Dear  Sir  [he  writes  to  the  editor  of  the  Revue  des 
Revues\  : You  ask  me  my  view  as  to  the  possible  success  of 
the  Universal  Congress  of  Peace.  I hold  with  Darwin  that 
violent  struggle  is  a law  of  nature  which  overrules  all  other 
laws;  I hold  with  Joseph  de  Maistre  that  it  is  a divine  law; 
two  different  ways  of  describing  the  same  thing.  If  by 
some  impossible  chance  a fraction  of  human  society — all  the 
civilized  West,  let  us  suppose — were  to  succeed  in  suspend- 
ing the  action  of  this  law,  some  races  of  stronger  instincts 
would  undertake  the  task  of  putting  it  into  action  against 
us:  those  races  would  vindicate  nature’s  reasoning  against 
human  reason;  they  would  be  successful,  because  the  cer- 
tainty of  peace — I do  not  say  peace,  I say  the  certainty  of 
peace — would,  in  half  a century,  engender  a corruption  and 
a decadence  more  destructive  for  mankind  than  the  worst  of 
wars.  I believe  that  we  must  do  with  war — the  criminal  law 
of  humanity — as  with  all  our  criminal  laws,  that  is,  soften 
them,  put  them  in  force  as  rarely  as  possible;  use  every 
effort  to  make  their  application  unnecessary.  But  all  the 
experience  of  history  teaches  us  that  they  cannot  be  alto- 
gether suppressed  so  long  as  two  men  are  left  on  earth,  with 
bread,  money,  and  a woman  between  them. 

“I  should  be  very  happy  if  the  Congress  would  prove  me 
in  error.  But  I doubt  if  it  can  prove  history,  nature,  and 
God  in  error  also. 

“I  am,  dear  sir,  etc. 

“E.  M.  DE  VOGUl” 

This  amounts  to  saying  that  history,  human  nature,  and 
God  show  us  that  so  long  as  there  are  two  men,  and  bread, 
money  and  a woman — there  will  be  war.  That  is  to  say 
that  no  progress  will  lead  men  to  rise  above  the  savage  con- 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


163 


ception  of  life,  which  regards  no  participation  of  bread, 
money  (money  is  good  in  this  context)  and  woman  possible 
without  fighting. 

They  are  strange  people,  these  men  who  assemble  in  Con- 
gresses, and  make  speeches  to  show  us  how  to  catch  birds 
by  putting  salt  on  their  tails,  though  they  must  know  it  is 
impossible  to  do  it.  And  amazing  are  they  too,  who,  like 
Maupassant,  Rod,  and  many  others,  see  clearly  all  the  hor- 
ror of  war,  all  the  inconsistency  of  men  not  doing  what  is 
needful,  right,  and  beneficial  for  them  to  do ; who  lament 
over  the  tragedy  of  life,  and  do  not  see  that  the  whole 
tragedy  is  at  an  end  directly  men,  ceasing  to  take  account 
of  any  unnecessary  considerations,  refuse  to  do  what  is  hate- 
ful and  disastrous  to  them.  They  are  amazing  people  truly, 
but  those  who,  like  De  Vogiie  and  others,  who,  professing 
the  doctrine  of  evolution,  regard  war  as  not  only  inevitable, 
but  beneficial,  and  therefore  desirable — they  are  terrible, 
hideous,  in  their  moral  perversion.  The  others,  at  least, 
say  that  they  hate  evil,  and  love  good,  but  these  openly 
declare  that  good  and  evil  do  not  exist. 

All  discussion  of  the  possibility  of  re-establishing  peace 
instead  of  everlasting  war — is  the  pernicious  sentimentality 
of  phrasemongers.  There  is  a law  of  evolution  by  which  it 
follows  that  I must  live  and  act  in  an  evil  way;  what  is  to 
be  done?  I am  an  educated  man,  I know  the  law  of  evolu- 
tion, and  therefore  I will  act  in  an  evil  way.  " Entroiis  au 
palais  de  la  guerre."  There  is  the  law  of  evolution,  and 
therefore  there  is  neither  good  nor  evil,  and  one  must  live 
for  the  sake  of  one’s  personal  existence,  leaving  the  rest  to 
the  action  of  the  law  of  evolution.  This  is  the  last  word  of 
refined  culture,  and  with  it,  of  that  overshadowing  of  con- 
science which  has  come  upon  the  educated  classes  of  our 
times.  The  desire  of  the  educated  classes  to  support  the 
ideas  they  prefer,  and  the  order  of  existence  based  on  them, 
has  attained  its  furthest  limits.  They  lie,  and  delude  them- 


164 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


selves,  and  one  another,  with  the  subtlest  forms  of  decep- 
tion, simply  to  obscure,  to  deaden  conscience. 

Instead  of  transforming  their  life  into  harmony  with  their 
conscience,  they  try  by  every  means  to  stifle  its  voice.  But 
it  is  in  darkness  that  the  light  begins  to  shine,  and  so  the 
light  is  rising  upon  our  epoch. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

SIGNIFICANCE  OF  COMPULSORY  SERVICE. 

Universal  Compulsory  Service  is  not  a Political  Accident,  but  the 
Furthest  Limit  of  the  Contradiction  Inherent  in  the  Social  Conception 
of  Life — Origin  of  Authority  in  Society — Basis  of  Authority  is  Physi- 
cal Violence — To  be  Able  to  Perform  its  Acts  of  Violence  Authority 
Needs  a Special  Organization — The  Army — Authority,  that  is.  Vio- 
lence, is  the  Principle  which  is  Destroying  the  Social  Conception  of 
Life — Attitude  of  Authority  to  the  Masses,  that  is,  Attitude  of  Gov- 
ernment to  Working  Oppressed  Classes — Governments  Try  to  Foster 
in  Working  Classes  the  Idea  that  State  Force  is  Necessary  to  Defend 
Them  from  External  Enemies — But  the  Army  is  Principally  Needed  to 
Preserve  Government  from  its  own  Subjects — The  Working  Classes — 
Speech  of  M.  de  Capri vi — All  Privileges  of  Ruling  Classes  Based  on 
Violence — The  Increase  of  Armies  up  to  Point  of  Universal  Service — 
Universal  Compulsory  Service  Destroys  all  the  Advantages  of  Social 
Life,  which  Government  is  Intended  to  Preserve — Compulsory  Service 
is  the  Furthest  Limit  of  Submission,  since  in  Name  of  the  State  it 
Requires  Sacrifice  of  all  that  can  be  Precious  to  a Man — Is  Govern- 
ment Necessary? — The  Sacrifices  Demanded  by  Government  in  Com- 
pulsory Service  have  No  Longer  any  Reasonable  Basis — And  there  is 
More  Advantage  to  be  Gained  by  not  Submitting  to  the  Demands 
of  the  State  than  by  Submitting  to  Them. 

Educated  people  of  the  upper  classes  are  trying  to 
stifle  the  ever-growing  sense  of  the  necessity  of  transform- 
ing the  existing  social  order.  But  life,  which  goes  on 
growing  more  complex,  and  developing  in  the  same  direc- 
tion, and  increases  the  inconsistencies  and  the  sufferings 


IS  IVITHTN  YOU." 


165 


of  men,  brings  them  to  the  limit  beyond  which  they  can- 
not go.  This  furthest  limit  of  inconsistency  is  universal 
compulsory  military  service. 

It  is  usually  supposed  that  universal  military  service  and 
the  increased  armaments  connected  with  it,  as  well  as  the 
resulting  increase  of  taxes  and  national  debts,  are  a passing 
phenomenon,  produced  by  the  particular  political  situation 
of  Europe,  and  that  it  may  be  removed  by  certain  political 
combinations  without  any  modification  of  the  inner  order 
of  life. 

-Xhis^is .absolutely  incorrect.  Universal  military  service 
is  only  the  internal  inconsistency  inherent  in  the  social 
conception  of  life,  carried  to  its  furthest  limits,  and  becom- 
ing evident  when  a certain  stage  of  material  development 
is  reached. 

The  social  conception  of  life,  we  have  seen,  consists  iiT 
the  transfer  of  the  aim  of  life  from  the  individual  to  groups 
and  their  maintenance — to  the  tribe,  famil}'’,  race,  or  state. 

In  the  social  conception  of  life  it  is  supposed  that  since 
the  aim  of  life  is  found  in  groups  of  individuals,  individuals 
will  voluntarily  sacrifice  their  own  interests  for  the  interests 
of  the  group.  And  so  it  has  been,  and  still  is,  in  fact,  in 
certain  groups,  the  distinction  being  that  they  are  the  most 
primitive  forms  of  association  in  the  family  or  tribe  or  race, 
or  even  in  the  patriarchal  state.  Through  tradition  handed 
down  by  education  and  supported  by  religious  sentiment, 
individuals  without  compulsion  merged  their  interests  in 
the  interest  of  the  group  and  sacrificed  their  own  good  for 
the  general  welfare. 

But  the  more  complex  and  the  larger  societies  become, 
and  especially  the  more  often  conquest  becomes  the  cause 
of  the  amalgamation  of  people  into  a state,  the  more  often 
individuals  strive  to  .attain  their  own  aims  at  the  public 
expense,  and  the  more  often  it  becomes  necessary  to 
restrain  these  insubordinate  individuals  by  recourse  to 


i66 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


authority,  that  is,  to  violence.  The  champions  of  the 
social  conception  of  life  usually  try  to  connect  the  idea  of 
authority,  that  is,  of  violence,  with  the  idea  of  moral  influ- 
ence, but  this  connection  is  quite  impossible. 

The  effect  of  moral  influence  on  a man  is  to  change  his 
desires  and  to  bend  them  in  the  direction  of  the  duty 
required  of  him.  The  man  who  is  controlled  by  moral 
influence  acts  in  accordance  with  his  own  desires.  Author- 
ity, in  the  sense  in  which  the  word  is  ordinarily  understood, 
is  a means  of  forcing  a man  to  act  in  opposition  to  his 
desires.  The  man  who  submits  to  authority  does  not  do 
as  he  chooses  but  as  he  is  obliged  by  authority.  Nothing 
can  oblige  a man  to  do  what  he  does  not  choose  except 
physical  force,  or  the  threat  of  it,  that  is — deprivation  of 
freedom,  blows,  imprisonment,  or  threats — easily  carried 
out — of  such  punishments.  This  is  what  authority  consists 
of  and  always  has  consisted  of. 

In  spite  of  the  unceasing  efforts  of  those  who  happen  to 
be  in  authority  to  conceal  this  and  attribute  some  other  sig- 
nificance to  it,  authority  has  always  meant  for  man  the 
cord,  the  chain  with  which  he  is  bound  and  fettered,  or  the 
knout  with  which  he  is  to  be  flogged,  or  the  ax  with  which 
he  is  to  have  hands,  ears,  nose,  or  head  cut  off,  or  at  the 
very  least,  the  threat  of  these  terrors.  So  it  was  under 
Nero  and  Ghenghis  Khan,  and  so  it  is  to-day,  even  under 
the  most  liberal  government  in  the  Republics  of  the  United 
States  or  of  France.  If  men  submit  to  authority,  it  is  only 
because  they  are  liable  to  these  punishments  in  case  of 
non-submission.  All  state  obligations,  payment  of  taxes, 
fulfillment  of  state  duties,  and  submission  to  punishments, 
exile,  fines,  etc.,  to  which  people  appear  to  submit  volun- 
tarily, are  always  based  on  bodily  violence  or  the  threat 
of  it. 

The  basis  of  authority  is  bodily  violence.  The  possi- 
bility of  applying  bodily  violence  to  people  is  provided 


/S  WITHIN  YOU. 


167 


above  all  by  an  organization  of  armed  men,  trained  to  act 
in  unison  in  submission  to  one  will.  These  bands  of  armed 
men,  submissive  to  a single  will,  are  what  constitute  the 
army.  The  army  has  always  been  and  still  is  the  basis  of 
power.  Power  is  always  in  the  hands  of  those  who  control 
the  army,  and  all  men  in  power — from  the  Roman  Caesars 
to  the  Russian  and  German  Emperors — take  more  interest 
in  their  army  than  in  anything,  and  court  popularity  in  the 
army,  knowing  that  if  that  is  on  their  side  their  power  is 
secure. 

The  formation  and  aggrandizement  of  the  army,  indis- 
pensable to  the  maintenance  of  authority,  is  what  has  intro- 
duced into  the  social  conception  of  life  the  principle  that  is 
destroying  it. 

The  object  of  authority  and  the  justification  for  its  exist- 
ence lie  in  the  restraint  of  those  who  aim  at  attaining  their 
personal  interests  to  the  detriment  of  the  interests  of 
society. 

But  however  power  has  been  gained,  those  who  possess  . 
it  are  in  no  way  different  from  other  men,  and  therefore  no  i 
more  disposed  than  others  to  subordinate  their  own  inter-  * 
ests  to  those  of  the  society.  On  the  contrary,  having  the 
power  to  do  so  at  their  disposal,  they  are  more  disposed 
than  others  to  subordinate  the  public  interests  to  their  own. 
Whatever  means  men  have  devised  for  preventing  those  in 
authority  from  over-riding  public  interests  for  tlieir  own 
benefit,  or  for  intrusting  power  only  to  the  most  faultless 
people,  they  have  not  so  far  succeeded  in  either  of  those 
aims. 

All  the  methods  of  appointing  authorities  that  have  been 
tried,  divine  right,  and  election,  and  heredity,  and  ballot- 
ing, and  assemblies  and  parliaments  and  senate — have  all 
proved  ineffectual.  Everyone  knows  that  not  one  of  these 
methods  attains  the  aim  either  of  intrusting  power  only  to 
the  incorruptible,  or  of  preventing  power  from  being 


i68 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


abused.  Everyone  knows  on  the  contrary  that  men  in 
authority — be  they  emperors,  ministers,  governors*  or 
police  officers — are  always,  simply  from  the  possession  of 
power,  more  liable  to  be  demoralized,  that  is,  to  subordinate 
public  interests  to  their  personal  aims  than  those  who  have 
not  the  power  to  do  so.  Indeed,  it  could  not  be  other- 
wise. 

The  state  conception  of  life  could  be  justified  only  so 
long  as  all  men  voluntarily  sacrificed  their  personal  interests 
to  the  public  welfare.  But  so  soon  as  there  were  indi- 
viduals who  would  not  voluntarily  sacrifice  their  own 
interests,  and  authority,  that  is,  violence,  was  needed  to 
restrain  them,  then  the  disintegrating  principle  of  the 
coercion  of  one  set  of  people  by  another  set  entered  into 
the  social  conception  of  the  organization  based  on  it. 

For  the  authority  of  one  set  of  men  over  another  to  attain 
its  object  of  restraining  those  who  override  public  interests 
for  their  personal  ends,  power  ought  only  to  be  put  into  the 
hands  of  the  impeccable,  as  it  is  supposed  to  be  among  the 
Chinese,  and  as  it  was  supposed  to  be  in  the  Middle  Ages, 
and  is  even  now  supposed  to  be  by  those  who  believe  in  the 
consecration  by  anointing.  Only  under  those  conditions 
could  the  social  organization  be  justified. 

But  since  this  is  not  the  case,  and  on  the  contrary  men 
in  power  are  always  far  from  being  saints,  through  the  very 
fact  of  their  possession  of  power,  the  social  organization 
based  on  power  has  no  justification. 

Even  if  there  was  once  a time  when,  owing  to  the  low 
standard  of  morals,  and  the  disposition  of  men  to  violence, 
the  existence  of  an  authority  to  restrain  such  violence  was 
an  advantage,  because  the  violence  of  government  was  less 
than  the  violence  of  individuals,  one  cannot  but  see  that 
this  advantage  could  not  be  lasting.  As  the  disposition  of 
individuals  to  violence  diminished,  and  as  the  habits  of  the 
people  became  more  civilized,  and  as  power  grew  more 


IS  WITHIN  YOU."  169 

demoralized  through  lack  of  restraint,  this  advantage  dis-! 
appeared. 

The  whole  history  of  the  last  two  thousand  years  is  noth- 
ing but  the  history  of  this  gradual  change  of  relation 
between  the  moral  development  of  the  masses  on  the  one , 
hand  and  the  demoralization  of  governments  on  the  other., 

This,  put  simply^  is  how  it  has  corne  to  pass. 

Men  lived  in  families,  tribes,  and  races,  at  feud  with  one 
another,  plundering,  outraging,  and  killing  one  another. 
These  violent  hostilities  were  carried  on  on  a large  and  on  a 
small  scale  : man  against  man,  family  against  family,  tribe 
against  tribe,  race  against  race,  and  people  against  people. 
The  larger  and  stronger  groups  conquered  and  absorbed 
the  weaker,  and  the  larger  and  stronger  they  became,  the 
more  internal  feuds  disappeared  and  the  more  the  con- 
tinuity of  the  group  seemed  assured. 

The  members  of  a family  or  tribe,  united  into  one  com- 
munity, are  less  hostile  among  themselves,  and  families  and 
tribes  do  not  die  like  one  man,  but  have  a continuity  of 
existence.  Between  the  members  of  one  state,  subject  to 
a single  authority,  the  strife  between  individuals  seems  still 
less  and  the  life  of  the  state  seems  even  more  secure. 

Their  association  into  larger  and  larger  groups  was  jiqt ' 
the  result  of  the  conscious  pecqgiiitiaa_oX_the  benefits  of 
such  associations,  as  it  is  said  to  be  in  the  story  of  the 
Varyagi.  It  was  produced,  on  one  hand,  by  the  natural 
growth  of  population,  and,  on  the  other,  by  struggle  and 
conquest. 

After  conquest  the  power  of  the  emperor  puts  an  end  to 
internal  dissensions,  and  so  the  state  conception  of  life 
justifies  itself.  But  this  justification  is  never  more  than 
temporary.  Internal  dissensions  disappear  only  in  propor- 
tion to  the  degree  of  oppression  exerted  by  the  authority 
over  the  dissentient  individuals.  The  violence  of  internal 
feud  crushed  by  authority  reappears  in  authority  itself. 


iTo 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


which  falls  into  the  hands  of  men  who,  like  the  rest,  are 
frequently  or  always  ready  to  sacrifice  the  public  welfare 
to  their  personal  interest,  with  the  difference  that  their 
subjects  cannot  resist  them,  and  thus  they  are  exposed  to 
all  the  demoralizing  influence  of  authority.  And  thus  the 
evil  of  violence,  when  it  passes  into  the  hands  of  authority, 
is  always  growing  and  growing,  and  in  time  becomes  greater 
than  the  evil  it  is  supposed  to  suppress,  while,  at  the  same 
time,  the  tendency  to  violence  in  the  members  of  the  society 
becomes  weaker  and  weaker,  so  that  the  violence  of 
authority  is  less  and  less  needed. 

Government  authorit)’’,  even  if  it  does  suppress  private 
violence,  always  introduces  into  the  life  of  men  fresh  forms 
of  violence,  which  tend  to  become  greater  and  greater  in 
proportion  to  the  duration  and  strength  of  the  govern, 
ment. 

So  that  though  the  violence  of  power  is  less  noticeable 
in  government  than  when  it  is  employed  by  members  of 
society  against  one  another,  because  it  finds  expression  in 
submission,  and  not  in  strife,  it  nevertheless  exists,  and 
often  to  a greater  degree  than  in  former  days. 

And  it  could  not  be  otherwise,  since,  apart  from  the 
demoralizing  influence  of  power,  the  policy  or  even  the 
unconscious  tendency  of  those  in  power  will  always  be  to 
reduce  their  subjects  to  the  extreme  of  weakness,  for  the 
weaker  the  oppressed,  the  less  effort  need  be  made  to  keep 
him  in  subjection. 

And  therefore  the  oppression  of  the  oppressed  always 
goes  on  growing  up  to  the  furthest  limit,  beyond  which  it 
cannot  go  without  killing  the  goose  with  the  golden  eggs. 
And  if  the  goose  lays  no  more  eggs,  like  the  American 
Indians,  negroes,  and  Fijians,  then  it  is  killed  in  spite  of 
the  sincere  protests  of  philanthropists. 

The  most  convincing  example  of  this  is  to  be  found  in 
the  condition  of  the  working  classes  of  our  epoch,  who  are 


75  iviTmAT  you: 


171 


in  reality  no  better  than  the  slaves  of  ancient  times  sub- 
dued by  conquest. 

In  spite  of  the  pretended  efforts  of  the  higher  classes  to 
ameliorate  the  position  of  the  workers,  all  the  working 
classes  of  the  present  day  are  kept  down  by  the  inflexible 
iron  law  by  which  they  only  get  just  what  is  barely  neces- 
sary, so  that  they  are  forced  to  work  without  ceasing  while 
still  retaining  strength  enough  to  labor  for  their  employers, 
who  are  I’eally  those  who  have  conquered  and  enslaved 
them.  -- — 

So  it  has  always  been.  In  ratio  to  the  duration  and  I J 
increasing  strength  of  authority  its  advantages  for  its  sub-  | 
jects  disappear  and  its  disadvantages  increase.  - 

And  this  has  been  so,  independently  of  the  forms  of 
government  under  which  nations  have  lived.  The  only 
difference  is  that  under  a despotic  form  of  government  the 
authority  is  concentrated  in  a small  number  of  oppressors 
and  violence  takes  a cruder  form  ; under  constitutional 
monarchies  and  republics  as  in  France  and  America  author- 
ity is  divided  among  a great  number  of  oppressors  and  the 
forms  assumed  by  violence  is  less  crude,  but  its  effect  of 
making  the  disadvantages  of  authority  greater  than  its 
advantages,  and  of  enfeebling  the  oppressed  to  the  furthest 
extreme  to  which  they  can  be  reduced  with  advantage  to 
the  oppressors,  remains  always  the  same. 

Such  has  been  and  still  is  the  condition  of  all  the 
oppressed,  but  hitherto  they  have  not  recognized  the  fact. 

In  the  majority  of  instances  they  have  believed  in  all  sim- 
plicity that  governments  exist  for  their  benefit ; that  they 
would  be  lost  without  a government  ; that  the  very  idea  of 
living  without  a government  is  a blasphemy  which  one 
hardly  dare  put  into  words  ; that  this  is  the — for  some 
reason  terrible — doctrine  of  anarchism,  with  which  a mental 
picture  of  all  kinds  of  horrors  is  associated. 

People  have  believed,  as  though  it  were  something  fully 


1"]2 


‘ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


proved,  and  so  needing  no  proof,  that  since  all  nations  have 
hitherto  developed  in  the  form  of  states,  that  form  of 
organization  is  an  indispensable  condition  of  the  develop- 
ment of  humanity. 

And  in  that  way  it  has  lasted  for  hundreds  and  thou- 
sands of  years,  and  governments — those  who  happened  to 
be  in  power — have  tried  it,  and  are  now  trying  more  zeal- 
ously than  ever  to  keep  their  subjects  in  this  error. 

So  it  was  under  the  Roman  emperors  and  so  it  is  now. 
In  spite  of  the  fact  that  the  sense  of  the  uselessness  and 
even  injurious  effects  of  state  violence  is  more  and  more 
penetrating  into  men’s  consciousness,  things  might  have 
gone  on  in  the  same  way  forever  if  governments  were  not 
under  the  necessity  of  constantly  increasing  their  armies  in 
order  to  maintain  their  power. 

It  is  generally  supposed  that  governments  strengthen 
their  forces  only  to  defend  the  state  from  other  states,  in 
oblivion  of  the  fact  that  armies  are  necessary,  before  all 
things,  for  the  defense  of  governments  from  their  own 
oppressed  and  enslaved  subjects. 

That  has  always  been  necessary,  and  has  become  more 
and  more  necessary  with  the  increased  diffusion  of  educa- 
tion among  the  masses,  with  the  improved  communication 
between  people  of  the  same  and  of  different  nationalities. 
It  has  become  particularly  indispensable  now  in  the  face  of 
communism,  socialism,  anarchism,  and  the  labor  movement 
generally.  Governments  feel  that  it  is  so,  and  strengthen 
the  force  of  their  disciplined  armies.* 

In  the  German  Reichstag  not  long  ago,  in  reply  to  a 

* The  fact  that  in  America  the  abuses  of  authority  exist  in  spite  of  the 
small  number  of  their  troops  not  only  fails  to  disprove  this  position,  but 
positively  confirms  it.  In  America  there  are  fewer  soldiers  than  in 
other  states.  That  is  why  there  is  nowhere  else  so  little  oppression  of 
the  working  classes,  and  no  country  where  the  end  of  the  abuses  of 
government  and  of  government  itself  seems  so  near.  Of  late  as  the  com- 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


173 


question  why  funds  were  needed  for  raising  the  salaries  of 
the  under-officers,  the  German  Chancellor  openly  declared 
that  trustworthy  under-officers  were  necessary  to  contend 
against  socialism.  Caprivi  only  said  aloud  what  every 
statesman  knows  and  assiduously  conceals  from  the  people. 
The  reason  to  which  he  gave  e.xpression  is  essentially  the 
same  as  that  which  made  the  French  kings  and  the  popes 
engage  Swiss  and  Scotch  guards,  and  makes  the  Rus- 
sian authorities  of  to-day  so  carefully  distribute  the  re- 
cruits, so  that  the  regiments  from  the  frontiers  are  stationed 
in  central  districts,  and  the  regiments  from  the  center  are 
stationed  on  the  frontiers.  The  meaning  of  Caprivi’s 
speech,  put  into  plain  language,  is  that  funds  are  needed, 
not  to  resist  foreign  foes,  but  to  buy  U7ider-officers  to  be 
ready  to  act  against  the  enslaved  toiling  masses. 

Caprivi  incautiously  gave  utterance  to  what  everyone 
knows  perfectly  well,  or  at  least  feels  vaguely  if  he  does  not 
recognize  it,  that  is,  that  the  existing  order  of  life  is  as  it 
is,  not,  as  would  be  natural  and  right,  because  the  people 
wish  it  to  be  so,  but  because  it  is  so  maintained  by  state 
violence,  by  the  army  with  its  bought  under-officers  and 
generals. 

If  the  laborer  has  no  land,  if  he  cannot  use  the  natural 
right  of  every  man  to  derive  subsistence  for  himself  and 
his  family  out  of  the  land,  that  is  not  because  the  people 
wish  it  to  be  so,  but  because  a certain  set  of  men,  the  land- 
owners,  have  appropriated  the  right  of  giving  or  refusing 
admittance  to  the  land  to  the  laborers.  And  this  abnormal 
order  of  things  is  maintained  by  the  army.  If  the  immense 

binations  of  laborers  gain  in  strength,  one  hears  more  and  more  fre- 
quently the  cry  raised  for  the  increase  of  the  army,  though  the  United 
States  are  not  threatened  with  any  attack  from  without.  The  upper 
classes  know  that  an  army  of  fifty  thousand  will  soon  be  insufficient,  and 
no  longer  relying  on  Pinkerton’s  men,  they  feel  that  the  security  of 
their  position  depends  on  the  increased  strength  of  the  army. 


*74 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


wealth  produced  by  the  labor  of  the  working  classes  is  not 
regarded  as  the  property  of  all,  but  as  the  property  of  a 
few  exceptional  persons  ; if  labor  is  taxed  by  authority  and 
the  taxes  spent  by  a few  on  what  they  think  fit ; if  strikes 
on  the  part  of  laborers  are  repressed,  while  on  the  part  of 
capitalists  they  are  encouraged  ; if  certain  persons  appro- 
priate the  right  of  choosing  the  form  of  the  education, 
religious  and  secular,  of  children,  and  certain  persons 
monopolize  the  right  of  making  the  laws  all  must  obey,  and 
so  dispose  of  the  lives  and  properties  of  other  people — all 
this  is  not  done  because  the  people  wish  it  and  because  it 
is  what  is  natural  and  right,  but  because  the  government 
and  ruling  classes  wish  this  to  be  so  for  their  own  benefit, 
and  insist  on  its  being  so  even  by  physical  violence. 

Everyone,  if  he  does  not  recognize  this  now,  will  know 
that  it  is  so  at  the  first  attempt  at  insubordination  or  at  a 
revolution  of  the  existing  order. 

Armies,  then,  are  needed  by  governments  and  by  the 
ruling  classes  above  all  to  support  the  present  order, 
which,  far  from  being  the  result  of  the  people’s  needs,  is 
often  in  direct  antagonism  to  them,  and  is  only  beneficial  to 
the  government  and  ruling  classes. 

To  keep  their  subjects  in  oppression  and  to  be  able  to 
enjoy  the  fruits  of  their  labor  the  government  must  have 
armed  forces. 

But  there  is  not  only  one  government.  There  are  other 
governments,  exploiting  their  subjects  by  violence  in  the 
same  way,  and  always  ready  to  pounce  down  on  any  other 
government  and  carry  off  the  fruits  of  the  toil  of  its 
enslaved  subjects.  And  so  every  government  needs  an 
army  also  to  protect  its  booty  from  its  neighbor  brigands. 
Every  government  is  thus  involuntarily  reduced  to  the 
necessity  of  emulating  one  another  in  the  increase  of  their 
armies.  This  increase  is  contagious,  as  Montesquieu 
pointed  out  150  years  ago. 


IS  WITHIN-  YOU." 


I7S 

Every  increase  in  the  army  of  one  state,  with  the  aim  of 
self-defense  against  its  subjects,  becomes  a source  of 
danger  for  neighboring  states  and  calls  for  a similar  in- 
crease in  their  armies. 

The  armed  forces  have  reached  their  present  number 
of  millions  not  only  through  the  menace  of  danger  from 
neighboring  states,  but  principally  through  the  necessity 
of  subduing  every  effort  at  revolt  on  the  part  of  the  sub- 
jects. 

JBoLb causes,  mutually  dependent,  contribute  to  the  same 
result  at  once  ; troops  are  required  against  internal  forces 
and  also  to  keep  up  a position  with  other  states.  One  is 
the  result  ,of  the  other.  The  despotism  of  a government 
always  increases  with  the  strength  of  the  army  and  its 
e.xternal  successes,  and  the  aggressiveness  of  a govern- 
ment increases  with  its  internal  despotism. 

The  rivalry  of  the  European  states  in  constantly  increas- 
ing their  forces  has  reduced  them  to  the  necessity  of  having 
recourse  to  universal  military  service,  since  by  that  means 
the  greatest  possible  number  of  soldiers  is  obtained  at  the 
least  possible  expense.  Germany  first  hit  on  this  device. 
And  directly  one  state  adopted  it  the  others  were  obliged 
to  do  the  same.  And  by  this  means  all  citizens  are  under 
arms  to  support  the  iniquities  practiced  upon  them  ; all 
citizens  have  become  their  own  oppressors. 

Universal  military  service  __was  an  inevitabje  Jogical 
mecessityqto  which  we  were  bound  to  come.  But  it  is  alsx?. 
the  last  expression  of  the  inconsistency__.i.nUereiit_.in,  the. 
social  conception  of  Ijfe,  when  violence  istieed.e.d  to  main- 
tain it.  This  inconsistency  has  become  obvious  in  univer- 
sal military  service.  In  fact,  the  whole  significance  of  the 
social  conception  of  life  consists  in  man’s  recognition  of 
the  barbarity  of  strife  between  individuals,  and  the  transi- 
toriness of  personal  life  itself,  and  the  transference  of  the 
aim  of  life  to  groups  of  persons.  But  with  universal 


176 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


military  service  it  comes  to  pass  that  men,  after  making 
every  sacrifice  to  get  rid  of  the  cruelty  of  strife  and  the 
insecurity  of  existence,  are  called  upon  to  face  all  the  perils 
they  had  meant  to  avoid.  And  in  addition  to  this  the 
state,  for  whose  sake  individuals  renounced  their  personal 
advantages,  is  exposed  again  to  the  same  risks  of  inse- 
curity and  lack  of  permanence  as  the  individual  himself 
Was  in  previous  times. 

Governments  were  to  give  men  freedom  from  the 
cruelty  of  personal  strife  and  security  in  the  permanence  of 
the  state  order  of  existence.  But  instead  of  doing  that 
they  expose  the  individuals  to  the  same  necessity  of  strife, 
substituting  strife  with  individuals  of  other  states  for  strife 
with  neighbors.  And  the  danger  of  destruction  for  the 
individual,  and  the  state  too,  they  leave  just  as  it  was. 

Universal  military  service  may  be  compared  to  the  efforts 
of  a man  to  prop  up  his  falling  house  who  so  surrounds  it 
and  fills  it  with  props  and  buttresses  and  planks  and 
scaffolding  that  he  manages  to  keep  the  house  standing 
only  by  making  it  impossible  to  live  in  it. 

In  the  same  way  universal  military  service  destroys  all 
the  benefits  of  the  social  order  of  life  which  it  is  employed 
to  maintain.  ' 

The  advantages  of  social  organization  are  security  of 
property  and  Tabor  and  associated  action  for  the  improve- 
ment of  existence — universal  military  service  destroys  all 
this. 

The  taxes  raised  from  the  people  for  war  preparations 
absorb  the  greater  part  of  the  produce  of  labor  which  the 
army  ought  to  defend. 

The  withdrawing  of  all  men  from  the  ordinary  course  of 
life  destroys  the  possibility  of  labor  itself.  The  danger 
of  war,  ever  ready  to  break  out,  renders  all  reforms  of 
social  life  vain  and  fruitless. 

In  former  days  if  a man  were  told  that  if  he  did  not 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


177 


acknowledge  the  authority  of  the  state,  he  would  be  ex- 
posed to  attack  from  enemies  domestic  and  foreign,  that  he 
would  have  to  resist  them  alone,  and  would  be  liable  to  be 
killed,  and  that  therefore  it  would  be  to  his  advantage  to 
put  up  with  some  hardships  to  secure  himself  from  these 
calamities,  he  might  well  believe  it,  seeing  that  the  sacrifices 
he  made  to  the  state  were  only  partial  and  gave  him  the 
hope  of  a tranquil  existence  in  a permanent  state.  But 
now,  when  the  sacrifices  have  been  increased  tenfold  and 
the  promised  advantages  are  disappearing,  it  would  be  a 
natural  reflection  that  submission  to  authority  is  absolutely 
useless. 

But  the  fatal  significance  of  universal  military  service,  as 
the  manifestation  of  the  contradiction  inherent  in  the  social 
conception  of  life,  is  not  only  apparent  in  that.  The  greatest 
manifestation  of  this  contradiction  consists  in  the  fact  that 
every  citizen  in  being  made  a soldier  becomes  a prop  of  the 
government  organization,  and  shares  the  responsibility  of 
everything  the  government  does,  even  though  he  may  not 
admit  its  legitimacy. 

Governments  assert  that  armies  are  needed  above  all  for 
external  defense,  but  that  is  not  true.  They  are  needed 
principally  against  their  subjects,  and  every  man,  under 
universal  military  service,  becomes  an  accomplice  in  all  the 
acts  of  violence  of  the  government  against  the  citizens 
without  any  choice  of  his  own. 

To  convince  oneself  of  this  one  need  only  remember 
what  things  are  done  in  every  state,  in  the  name  of  order 
and  the  public  welfare,  of  which  the  execution  always  falls 
to  the  army.  All  civil  outbreaks  for  dynastic  or  other  party 
reasons,  all  the  executions  that  follow  on  such  disturbances, 
all  repression  of  insurrections,  and  military  intervention  to 
break  up  meetings  and  to  suppress  strikes,  all  forced  extor- 
tion of  taxes,  all  the  iniquitous  distributions  of  land,  all  the 
restrictions  on  labor — are  either  carried  out  directly  by  the 


178 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


military  or  by  the  police  with  the  army  at  their  back.  Any- 
one who  serves  his  time  in  the  army  shares  the  responsi- 
bility of  all  these  things,  about  which  he  is,  in  some  cases, 
dubious,  while  very  often  they  are  directly  opposed  to  his 
conscience.  People  are  unwilling  to  be  turned  out  of  the 
land  they  have  cultivated  for  generations,  or  they  are  un- 
willing to  disperse  when  the  government  authority  orders 
them,  or  they  are  unwilling  to  pay  the  taxes  required  of 
them,  or  to  recognize  laws  as  binding  on  them  when  they 
have  had  no  hand  in  making  them,  or  to  be  deprived  of  their 
nationality — and  I,  in  the  fulfillment  of  my  military  duty, 
must  go  and  shoot  them  for  it.  How  can  I help  asking 
myself  when  I take  part  in  such  punishments,  whether  they 
are  just,  and  whether  I ought  to  assist  in  carrying  them 
out  ? 

Universal  service  is  the  extreme  limit  of  violence  neces- 
sary for  the  support  of  the  whole  state  organization,  and  it 
is  the  extreme  limit  to  which  submission  on  the  part  of  the 
subjects  can  go.  It  is  the  keystone  of  the  whole  edifice, 
and  its  fall  will  bring  it  all  down. 

The  time  has  come  when  the  ever-growing  abuse  of 
power  by  governments  and  their  struggles  with  one  another 
has  led  to  their  demanding  such  material  and  even  moral 
sacrifices  from  their  subjects  that  everyone  is  forced  to 
reflect  and  ask  himself,  “ Can  I make  these  sacrifices  ? And 
for  the  sake  of  what  am  I making  them?  I am  expected 
for  the  sake  of  the  state  to  make  these  sacrifices,  to  re- 
nounce everything  that  can  be  precious  to  man — iieace, 
family,  security,  and  human  dignity.”  What  is  this  state,  for 
whose  sake  such  terrible  sacrifices  have  to  be  made  ? And 
why  is  it  so  indispensably  necessary  ? “The  state,”  they 
tell  us,  “ is  indispensably  needed,  in  the  first  place,  because 
without  it  we  should  not  be  protected  against  the  attacks 
of  evil-disposed  persons  ; and  secondly,  except  for  the  state 
we  should  be  savages  and  should  have  neither  religion,  cul- 


/S  WITHIN  YOU." 


179 


ture,  education,  nor  commerce,  nor  means  of  communication, 
nor  other  social  institutions  ; and  thirdl}',  without  the  state 
to  defend  us  we  should  be  liable  to  be  conquered  and  en- 
slaved by  neighboring  peoples.” 

“ Except  for  the  state,”  they  say,  “ we  should  be  exposed 
to  the  attacks  of  evil-disposed  persons  in  our  own  country.” 

But  who  are  these  evil-disposed  persons  in  our  midst  from 
whose  attacks  we  are  preserved  by  the  state  and  its  army  ? 
Even  if,  three  or  four  centuries  ago,  when  men  prided 
themselves  on  their  warlike  prowess,  when  killing  men  was 
considered  an  heroic  achievement,  there  were  such  persons; 
we  know  very  well  that  there  are  no  such  persons  now,  that 
we  do  not  nowadays  carry  or  use  firearms,  but  everyone 
professes  humane  principles  and  feels  sympathy  for  his 
fellows,  and  wants  nothing  more  than  we  all  do — that  is,  to 
be  left  in  peace  to  enjoy  his  existence  undisturbed.  So  that 
nowadays  there  are  no  special  malefactors  from  whom  the 
state  could  defend  us.  If  by  these  evil-disposed  persons  is 
meant  the  men  who  are  punished  as  criminals,  we  know 
very  well  that  they  are  not  a different  kind  of  being  like 
wild  beasts  among  sheep,  but  are  men  just  like  ourselves, 
and  no  more  naturally  inclined  to  crimes  than  those  against 
whom  they  commit  them.  We  know  now  that  threats  and 
punishments  cannot  diminish  their  number;  that  that  can 
only  be  done  by  change  of  environment  and  moral  influence. 
So  that  tlie  justification  of  state  violence  on  the  ground  of 
the  protection  it  gives  us  from  evil-disposed  persons,  even 
if  it  had  some  foundation  three  or  four  centuries  ago,  has 
none  whatever  now.  At  present  one  would  rather  say  on 
the  contrary  that  the  action  of  the  state  with  its  cruel 
methods  of  punishment,  behind  the  general  moral  standard 
of  the  age,  such  as  prisons,  galleys,  gibbets,  and  guillotines, 
tends  rather  to  brutalize  the  people  than  to  civilize  them, 
and  consequently  rather  to  increase  than  diminish  the 
number  of  malefactors. 


l8o  “ the  kingdom  of  GOD 

“ Except  for  the  state,”  they  tell  us,  “ we  should  not  have 
any  religion,  education,  culture,  means  of  communication, 
and  so  on.  Without  the  state  men  would  not  have  been 
able  to  form  the  social  institutions  needed  for  doing  any- 
thing.” This  argument  too  was  well  founded  only  some 
centuries  ago. 

If  there  was  a time  when  people  were  so  disunited,  when 
they  had  so  little  means  of  communication  and  interchange 
of  ideas,  that  they  could  not  co-operate  and  agree  together 
in  any  common  action  in  commerce,  economics,  or  education 
without  the  state  as  a center,  this  want  of  common  action 
exists  no  longer.  The  great  extension  of  means  of  com- 
munication and  interchange  of  ideas  has  made  men  com- 
pletely able  to  dispense  with  state  aid  in  forming  societies, 
associations,  corporations,  and  congresses  for  scientific, 
economic,  and  political  objects.  Indeed  government  is 
more  often  an  obstacle  than  an  assistance  in  attaining  these 
aims. 

From  the  end  of  last  century  there  has  hardly  been  a 
single  progressive  movement  of  humanity  which  has  not 
been  retarded  by  the  government.  So  it  has  been  with 
abolition  of  corporal  punishment,  of  trial  by  torture,  and 
j of  slavery,  as  well  as  with  the  establishment  of  the  liberty 
I of  the  press  and  the  right  of  public  meeting.  In  our  day 
governments  not  only  fail  to  encourage,  but  directly  hinder 
every  movement  by  which  people  try  to  work  out  new  forms 
of  life  for  themselves.  Every  attempt  at  the  solution  of 
the  problems  of  labor,  land,  politics,  and  religion  meets  with 
direct  opposition  on  the  part  of  government. 

“Without  governments  nations  would  be  enslaved  by 
their  neighbors.”  It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  refute  this 
last  argument.  It  carries  its  refutation  on  the  face  of  it. 
The  government,  they  tell  us,  with  its  army,  is  necessary  to 
defend  us  from  neighboring  states  who  might  enslave  us. 
But  we  know  this  is  what  all  governments  say  of  one 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


i8i 

another,  and  yet  we  know  that  all  the  European  nations 
profess  the  same  principles  of  liberty  and  fraternity,  and 
therefore  stand  in  no  need  of  protection  against  one 
another.  And  if  defense  against  barbarous  nations  is 
meant,  one-thousandth  part  of  the  troops  now  under  arms 
would  be  amply  sufficient  for  that  purpose.  We  see  that  it 
is  really  the  very  opposite  of  what  we  have  been  told. 
The  power  of  the  state,  far  from  being  a security  against 
the  attacks  of  our  neighbors,  exposes  us,  on  the  contrary, 
to  much  greater  danger  of  such  attacks.  So  that  every 
man  who  is  led,  through  his  compulsory  service  in  the 
army,  to  reflect  on  the  value  of  the  state  for  whose  sake  he 
is  expected  to  be  ready  to  sacrifice  his  peace,  security,  and 
life,  cannot  fail  to  perceive  that  there  is  no  kind  of  justifi- 
cation in  modern  times  for  such  a sacrifice. 

And  it  is  not  only  from  the  theoretical  standpoint  that 
every  man  must  see  that  the  sacrifices  demanded  by  the 
state  have  no  justification.  Even  looking  at  it  practically, 
weighing,  that  is  to  say,  all  the  burdens  laid  on  him  by  the 
state,  no  man  can  fail  to  see  that  for  him  personally  to 
comply  with  state  demands  and  serve  in  the  army,  would, 
in  the  majority  of  cases,  be  more  disadvantageous  than  to 
refuse  to  do  so. 

If  the  majority  of  men  choose  to  submit  rather  than  to 
refuse,  it  is  not  the  result  of  sober  balancing  of  advantages 
and  disadvantages,  but  because  they  are  induced  by  a 
kind  of  hypnotizing  process  practiced  upon  them.  In 
submitting  they  simply  yield  to  the  suggestions  given 
them  as  orders,  without  thought  or  effort  of  will.  To  resist 
would  need  independent  thought  and  effort  of  which  every 
man  is  not  capable.  Even  apart  from  the  moral  signifi- 
cance of  compliance  or  non-compliance,  considering 
material  advantage  only,  non-compliance  will  be  more 
advantageous  in  general. 

Whoever  I may  be,  whether  I belong  to  the  well-to-do 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


182 

class  of  the  oppressors,  or  the  working-  class  of  the 
oppressed,  in  either  case  the  disadvantages  of  non-com- 
pliance are  less  and  its  advantages  greater  than  those  of 
compliance.  If  I belong  to  the  minority  of  oppressors  the 
disadvantage.‘5  of  non-compliance  will  consist  in  my  being 
brought  to  judgment  for  refusing  to  perform  my  duties  to 
the  state,  and  if  I am  lucky,  being  acquitted  or,  as  is  done 
in  the  case  of  the  Mennonites  in  Russia,  being  set  to  work 
out  my  military  service  at  some  civil  occupation  for  the 
state  ; while  if  I am  unlucky,  I may  be  condemned  to  exile 
or  imprisonment  for  two  or  three  years  (I  judge  by  the 
cases  that  have  occurred  in  Russia),  possibly  to  even  longer 
imprisonment,  or  possibly  to  death,  though  the  probability 
of  that  latter  is  very  remote. 

So  much  for  the  disadvantages  of  non-compliance.  The 
disadvantages  of  compliance  will  be  as  follows:  if  I am 
lucky  I sh'all  not  be  sent  to  murder  my  fellow-creatures, 
and  shall  not  be  exposed  to  great  danger  of  being  maimed 
and  killed,  but  shall  only  be  enrolled  into  military  slavery. 
I shall  be  dressed  up  like  a clown,  I shall  be  at  the  beck 
and  call  of  every  man  of  a higher  grade  than  my  own  from 
corporal  to  field-marshal,  shall  be  put  through  any  bodily 
contortions  at  their  pleasure,  and  after  being  kept  from 
one  to  five  years  I shall  have  for  ten  years  afterward  to 
be  in  readiness  to  undertake  all  of  it  again  at  any  minute. 
If  I am  unlucky  I may,  in  addition,  be  sent  to  war,  where  I 
shall  be  forced  to  kill  men  of  foreign  nations  who  have 
done  me  no  harm,  where  I may  be  maimed  or  killed,  or 
sent  to  certain  destruction  as  in  the  case  of  the  garrison  of 
Sevastopol,  and  other  cases  in  every  war,  or  what  would 
be  most  terrible  of  all,  I may  be  sent  against  my  own  com- 
patriots and  have  to  kill  my  own  brothers  for  some  dynastic 
or  other  state  interests  which  have  absolutely  nothing  to 
do  with  me.  So  much  for  the  comparative  disadvant- 


75  WITHIN  YOU."  183 

The  comparative  advantages  of  compliance  and  non- 
compliance  are  as  follows : 

For  the  man  who  submits,  the  advantages  will  be  that, 
after  exposing  himself  to  all  the  humiliation  and  perform- 
ing all  the  barbarities  required  of  him,  he  may,  if  he  escapes 
being  killed,  get  a decoration  of  red  or  gold  tinsel  to  stick 
on  his  clown’s  dress  ; he  may,  if  he  is  very  lucky,  be  put  in 
command  of  hundreds  of  thousands  of  others  as  brutalized 
as  himself ; be  called  a field-marshal,  and  get  a lot  of 
money. 

The  advantages  of  the  man  who  refuses  to  obey  will  con- 
sist in  preserving  his  dignity  as  a man,  gaining  the  approba- 
tion  of  good  men,  and  above  all  knowing  that  he  is  doing 
the  work  of  God,  and  so  undoubtedly  doing  good  to  his 
fellow-men. 

So  much  for  the  advantages  and  disadvantages  of  both 
lines  of  conduct  for  a man  of  the  wealthy  classes,  an  op- 
pressor- For  a man  of  the  poor  working  class  the  advan- 
tages and  disadvantages  will  be  the  same,  but  with  a great 
increase  of  disadvantages.  The  disadvantages  for  the  poor 
man  who  submits  will  be  aggravated  by  the  fact  that  he 
will  by  taking  part  in  it,  and,  as  it  were,  assenting  to  it 
strengthen  the  state  of  subjection  in  which  he  is  held  him- 
self. 

But  no  considerations  as  to  how  far  the  state  is  useful  or 
beneficial  to  the  men  who  help  to  support  it  by  serving  in 
the  army,  nor  of  the  advantages  or  disadvantages  for  the 
individual  of  compliance  or  non-compliance  with  state 
demands,  will  decide  the  question  of  the  continued  exist- 
ence or  the  abolition  of  government.  This  question  wilM 
be  finally  decided  beyond  appeal  by  the  religious  con-  | 
sciousness  or  conscience  of  every  man  who  is  forced,  I t/ 
whether  he  will  or  no,  through  universal  conscription,  to| 
face  the  question  whether  the  state  is  to  continue  to  exist} 
or  not.  — ^ 


184 


" THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

DOCTRINE  OF  NON-RESISTANCE  TO  EVIL  BY  FORCE  MUST 
INEVITABLY  BE  ACCEPTED  BY  MEN  OF  THE  PRESENT 
DAY. 

Christianity  is  Not  a System  of  Rules,  but  a New  Conception  of  Life,  and 
therefore  it  was  Not  Obligatory  and  was  Not  Accepted  in  its  True  Sig- 
nificance by  All,  but  only  by  a Few — Christianity  is.  Moreover, 
Prophetic  of  the  Destruction  of  the  Pagan  I.ife,  and  therefore  of 
Necessity  of  the  Acceptance  of  the  Christian  Doctrines — Non-resist- 
ance of  Evil  by  P'orce  is  One  Aspect  of  the  Christian  Doctrine,  which 
must  Inevitably  in  Our  Times  be  Accepted  by  Men — Two  Methods  of 
Deciding  Every  Quarrel — First  Method  is  to  Find  a Universal  Defini- 
tion of  Evil,  which  All  Must  Accept,  and  to  Resist  this  Evil  by  Force 
— Second  Method  is  the  Christian  One  of  Complete  Non-resistance  by 
Force — Though  the  P'ailure  of  the  First  Method  was  Recognized  since 
the  Early  Days  of  Christianity,  it  was  Still  Proposed,  and  only  as 
Mankind  has  Progressed  it  has  Become  More  and  More  Evident  that 
there  Cannot  be  any  Universal  Definition  of  Evil — This  is  Recog- 
nized by  All  at  the  Present  Day,  and  if  Force  is  Still  Used  to  Resist 
Evil,  it  is  Not  Because  it  is  Now  Regarded  as  Right,  but  Because 
People  Don’t  Know  How  to  Avoid  It — The  Difficulty  of  Avoiding  It 
is  the  Result  of  the  Subtle  and  Complex  Character  of  the  Government 
Use  of  Force — Force  is  Used  in  Four  Ways:  Intimidation,  Bribery, 
Hypnotism,  and  Coercion  by  Force  of  Arms — State  Violence  Can 
Never  be  Suppressed  by  the  Forcible  Overthrow  of  the  Government — 
Men  are  Led  by  the  Sufferings  of  the  Pagan  Mode  of  Life  to  the  Neces- 
sity of  Accepting  Christ’s  Teaching  with  its  Doctrine  of  Non-resist- 
ance by  Force — The  Consciousness  of  its  Truth  which  is  Diffused 
Throughout  Our  Society,  Will  also  Bring  About  its  Acceptance — This 
Consciousness  is  in  Complete  Contradiction  with  Our  Life — This  is 
Specially  Obvious  in  Compulsory  Military  Service,  but  Through  Habit 
and  the  Application  of  the  Four  Methods  of  Violence  by  the  State, 
Men  do  not  See  this  Inconsistency  of  Christianity  with  Life  of  a 
Soldier — They  do  Not  even  See  It,  though  the  Authorities  Themselves 
Show  all  the  Immorality  of  a Soldier’s  Duties  with  Perfect  Clearness — 
The  Call  to  Military  Service  is  the  Supreme  Test  for  Every  Man, 
when  the  Choice  is  Offered  Him,  between  Adopting  the  Christian 
Doctrine  of  Non-resistance,  or  Slavishly  Submitting  to  the  Existing 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


185 

State  Organization — Men  Usually  Renounce  All  They  Hold  Sacred, 
and  Submit  to  the  Demands  of  Government,  Seeming  to  See  No 
Other  Course  Open  to  Them — For  Men  of  the  Pagan  Conception  of 
Life  there  is  No  Other  Course  Open,  and  Never  Will  Be,  in  Spite  of 
the  Growing  Horrors  of  War — Society,  Made  Up  of  Such  Men,  Must 
Perish,  and  No  Social  Reorganization  Can  Save  It — Pagan  Life  Has 
Reached  Its  Extreme  Limit,  and  Will  Annihilate  Itself. 

It  is  often  said  that  if  Christianity  is  a truth,  it  ought  to 
have  been  accepted  by  everyone  directly  it  appeared,  and 
ought  to  have  transformed  men’s  lives  for  the  better.  But 
this  is  like  saying  that  if  the  seed  were  ripe  it  ought  at 
once  to  bring  forth  stalk,  flower,  and  fruit. 

The  Christian  religion  is  not  a legal  system  which,  being 
imposed  by  violence,  may  transform  men’s  lives.  Chris- 
tianity is  a new  and  higher  conception  of  life.  A new  con- 
ception of  life  cannot  be  imposed  on  men  ; it  can  only  be 
freely  assimilated.  And  it  can  only  be  freely  assimilated 
in  two  ways  : one  spiritual  and  internal,  the  other  experi- 
mental and  external. 

Some  people — a minority — by  a kind  of  prophetic  instinct 
divine  the  truth  of  the  doctrine,  surrender  themselves  to  it 
and  adopt  it.  Others — the  majority — only  through  a long 
course  of  mistakes,  experiments,  and  suffering  are  brought 
to  recognize  the  truth  of  the  doctrine  and  the  necessity  of 
adopting  it. 

And  by  this  experimental  external  method  the  majority 
of  Christian  men  have  now  been  brought  to  this  necessity 
of  assimilating  the  doctrine.  One  sometimes  wonders  whaT^ 
necessitated  the  corruption  of  Christianity  which  is  now 
the  greatest  obstacle  to  its  acceptance  in  its  true  signifi-  | 
cance. 

If  Christianity  had  been  presented  to  men  in  its  true, 
uncorrupted  form,  it  would  not  have  been  accepted  by  the 
majority,  who  would  have  been  as  untouched  by  it  as  the 
nations  of  Asia  are  now.  The  peoples  who  accepted  it  in 


1 86  ••  the  kingdom  OF  COD 

its  corrupt  form  were  subjected  to  its  slow  but  certain 
influence,  and  by  a long  course  of  errors  and  experiments 
and  their  resultant  sufferings  have  now  been  brought  to 
the  necessity  of  assimulating  it  in  its  true  significance. 

The  corruption  of  Christianity  and  its  acceptance  in  its 
corrupt  form  by  the  majority  of  men  was  as  necessary  as  it 
is  that  the  seed  should  remain  hidden  for  a certain  time  in 
the  earth  in  order  to  germinate. 

Christianity  is  at  once  a doctrine  of  truth  and  a proph- 
ecy. Eighteen  centuries  ago  Christianity  revealed  to  men 
the  truth  in  which  they  ought  to  live,  and  at  the  same  time 
foretold  what  human  life  would  become  if  men  would  not 
live  by  it  but  continued  to  live  by  their  previous  principles, 
and  what  it  would  become  if  they  accepted  the  Christian 
doctrine  and  carried  it  out  in  their  lives. 

Laying  down  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  the  principles 
by  which  to  guide  men’s  lives,  Christ  said  ; “ Whosoever 
heareth  these  sayings  of  mine,  and  doeth  them,  I will  liken 
him  unto  a wise  man,  who  built  his  house  upon  a rock;  and 
the  rain  descended,  and  the  floods  came,  and  the  winds 
blew,  and  beat  upon  that  house  ; and  it  fell  not,  for  it  was 
founded  upon  a rock.  A nd  everyone  that  heareth  these  say- 
ings, and  doeth  them  not,  shall  be  likened  unto  a foolish 
man,  who  built  his  house  upon  the  sand  ; and  the  rain 
descended,  and  the  floods  came,  and  the  winds  blew,  and 
beat  upon  that  house  ; and  it  fell  : and  great  was  the  fall 
of  it  ” (Matt.  vii.  24-27). 

And  now  after  eighteen  centuries  the  prophecy  has  been 
fulfilled.  Not  having  followed  Christ’s  teaching  generally 
and  its  application  to  social  life  in  non-resistance  to  evil, 
men  have  been  brought  in  spite  of  themselves  to  the  inevi- 
table destruction  foretold  by  Christ  for  those  who  do  not 
fulfill  his  teaching. 

People  often  think  the  question  of  non-resistance  to  evil 
by  force  is  a theoretical  one,  which  can  be  neglected.  Yet 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


187 


this  question  is  presented  by  life  itself  to  all  men,  and  calls 
for  some  answer  from  every  thinking  man.  Ever  since 
Christianity  has  been  outwardly  professed,  this  question  is 
for  men  in  their  social  life  like  the  question  which  presents 
itself  to  a traveler  when  the  road  on  which  he  has  been 
journeying  divides  into  two  branches.  He  must  go  on 
and  he  cannot  say  : I will  not  think  about  it,  but  will  go  on 
just  as  I did  before.  There  was  one  road,  now  there  are 
two,  and  he  must  make  his  choice. 

In  the  same  way  since  Christ’s  teaching  has  been  known 
by  men  they  cannot  say  : I will  live  as  before  and  will  not 
decide  the  question  of  resistance  or  non-resistance  to  evil 
by  force.  At  every  new  struggle  that  arises  one  must 
inevitably  decide  ; am  I,  or  am  I not,  to  resist  by  force 
what  I regard  as  evil. 

The  question  of  resistance  or  non-resistance  to  evil  arose 
when  the  first  conflict  between  men  took  place,  since  every 
conflict  is  nothing  else  than  resistance  by  force  to  what 
each  of  the  combatants  regards  as  evil.  But  before  Christ, 
men  did  not  see  that  resistance  by  force  to  what  each 
regards  as  evil,  simply  because  one  thinks  evil  what  the 
other  thinks  good,  is  only  one  of  the  methods  of  settling 
the  dispute,  and  that  there  is  another  method,  that  of  not 
resisting  evil  by  force  at  all. 

Before  Christ’s  teaching,  it  seemed  to  men  that  the  one 
only  means  of  settling  a dispute  was  by  resistance  to  evil 
by  force.  And  they  acted  accordingly,  each  of  the  com- 
batants trying  to  convince  himself  and  others  that  what 
each  respectively  regards  as  evil,  is  actually,  absolutely 
evil. 

And  to  do  this  from  the  earliest  time  men  have  devised 
definitions  of  evil  and  tried  to  make  them  binding  on  every- 
one. And  such  definitions  of  evil  sometimes  took  the  form 
of  laws,  supposed  to  have  been  received  by  supernatural 
means,  sometimes  of  the  commands  of  rulers  or  assemblies 


i88 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


to  whom  infallibility  was  attributed.  Men  resorted  to  vio- 
lence against  others,  and  convinced  themselves  and  others 
that  they  were  directing  their  violence  against  evil  recog- 
nized as  such  by  all. 

This  means  was  employed  from  the  earliest  times,  espe- 
cially by  those  who  had  gained  possession  of  authority,  and 
for  a long  while  its  irrationality  was  not  detected. 

But  the  longer  men  lived  in  the  world  and  the  more  com- 
plex their  relations  became,  the  more  evident  it  was  that  to 
resist  by  force  what  each  regarded  as  evil  was  irrational, 
that  conflict  was  in  no  way  lessened  thereby,  and  that  no 
human  definitions  can  succeed  in  making  what  some  regard 
as  evil  be  accepted  as  such  by  others. 

Already  at  the  time  Christianity  arose,  it  was  evident  to 
a great  number  of  people  in  the  Roman  Empire  where  it 
arose,  that  what  was  regarded  as  evil  by  Nero  and  Caligula 
could  not  be  regarded  as  evil  by  others.  Even  at  that  time 
men  had  begun  to  understand  that  human  laws,  though 
given  out  for  divine  laws,  were  compiled  by  men,  and  can- 
not be  infallible,  whatever  the  external  majesty  with  which 
they  are  invested,  and  that  erring  men  are  not  rendered 
infallible  by  assembling  together  and  calling  themselves  a 
senate  or  any  other  name.  Even  at  that  time  this  was  felt 
and  understood  by  many.  And  it  was  then  that  Christ 
preached  his  doctrine,  which  consisted  not  only  of  the  pro- 
hibition of  resistance  to  evil  by  force,  but  gave  a new  con- 
ception of  life  and  a means  of  putting  an  end  to  conflict 
between  all  men,  not  by  making  it  the  duty  of  one  section 
only  of  mankind  to  submit  without  conflict  to  what  is  pre- 
scribed to  them  by  certain  authorities,  but  by  making  it  the 
duty  of  all — and  consequently  of  those  in  authority — not  to 
resort  to  force  against  anyone  in  any  circumstances. 

d'his  doctrine  was  accepted  at  the  time  by  only  a very 
small  number  of  disciples.  The  majority  of  men,  especially 
all  who  were  in  power,  even  after  the  nominal  acceptance  of 


IS  mr/iiM  you: 


189 


Christianity,  continued  to  maintain  for  themselves  the  prin-  i 
ciple  of  resistance  by  force  to  what  they  regarded  as  evil.  / 
So  it  was  under  the  Roman  and  Byzantine  emperors,  and  so  | 
it  continued  to  be  later. 

The  insufficiency  of  the  principle  of  the  authoritative  defi- 
nition of  evil  and  resistance  to  it  by  force,  evident  as  it 
was  in  the  early  ages  of  Christianity,  becomes  still  more 
obvious  through  the  division  of  the  Roman  Empire  into 
many  states  of  equal  authority,  through  their  hostilities  and 
the  internal  conflicts  that  broke  out  within  them. 

But  men  were  not  ready  to  accept  the  solution  given  by 
Christ,  and  the  old  definitions  of  evil,  wliich  ought  to  be 
resisted,  continued  to  be  laid  down  by  means  of  making 
laws  binding  on  all  and  enforced  by  forcible  means.  The 
authority  who  decided  what  ought  to  be  regarded  as  evil 
and  resisted  by  force  was  at  one  time  the  Pope,  at  another 
an  emperor  or  king,  an  elective  assembly  or  a whole  nation. 
But  both  within  and  without  the  state  there  were  always 
men  to  be  found  who  did  not  accept  as  binding  on  them- 
selves the  laws  given  out  as  the  decrees  of  a god,  or  made 
by  men  invested  with  a sacred  character,  or  the  institutions 
supposed  to  represent  the  will  of  the  nation  ; and  there 
were  men  who  thought  good  what  the  existing  authorities 
regarded  as  bad,  and  who  struggled  against  the  authorities 
with  the  same  violence  as  was  employed  against  them. 

The  men  invested  with  religious  authority  regarded  as, 
evil  what  the  men  and  institutions  invested  with  temporal 
authority  regarded  as  good  and  vice  versa,  and  the  struggle' 
grew  more  and  more  intense.  And  the  longer  men  used  ■ 
violence  as  the  means  of  settling  their  disputes,  the  more  ' 
obvious  it  became  that  it  was  an  unsuitable  means,  since 
there  could  be  no  external  authority  able  to  define  evil 
recognized  by  all.  — - 

Things  went  on  like  this  for  eighteen  centuries,  and  at 
last  reached  the  present  position  in  which  it  is  absolutely 


190 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


obvious  that  there  is,  and  can  be,  no  external  definition  of 
■ evil  binding  upon  all.  Men  have  come  to  the  point  of 
ceasing  to  believe  in  the  possibility  or  even  desirability  of 
I finding  and  establishing  such  a general  definition.  It  has 
come  to  men  in  power  ceasing  to  attempt  to  prove  that 
what  they  regard  as  evil  is  evil,  and  simply  declaring  that 
they  regard  as  evil  what  they  don’t  like,  while  their  subjects 
no  longer  obey  them  because  they  accept  the  definition  of 
evil  laid  down  by  them,  but  simply  obey  because  they  can- 
Inot  help  themselves./  It  was  not  because  it  was  a good 
'uiing,  necessary  and  beneficial  to  men,  and  the  contrary 
course  would  have  been  an  evil,  but  simply  because  it  was 
the  will  of  those  in  power  that  Nice  was  incorporated  into 
France,  and  Lorraine  into  Germany,  and  Bohemia  into 
Austria,  and  that  Poland  was  divided,  and  Ireland  and 
India  ruled  by  the  English  government,  and  that  the 
Chinese  are  attacked  and  the  Africans  slaughtered,  and  the 
Chinese  prevented  from  immigrating  by  the  Americans,  and 
the  Jews  persecuted  by  the  Russians,  and  that  landowners 
appropriate  lands  they  do  not  cultivate  and  capitalists 
enjoy  the  fruits  of  the  labor  of  others.  It  has  come  to  the 
present  state  of  things  ; one  set  of  men  commit  acts  of 
violence  no  longer  on  the  pretext  of  resistance  to  evil,  but 
simply  for  their  profit  or  their  caprice,  and  another  set  sub- 
mit to  violence,  not  because  they  suppose,  as  was  su])posed 
in  former  times,  that  this  violence  was  practised  upon  them 
for  the  sake  of  securing  them  from  evil,  but  simply  because 
they  cannot  avoid  it. 

If  the  Roman,  or  the  man  of  mediseval  times,  or  the 
average  Russian  of  fifty  years  ago,  as  I remember  him,  was 
convinced  without  a shade  of  doubt  that  the  violence  of 
authority  was  indispensable  to  preserve  him  from  evil  ; that 
taxes,  dues,  serfage,  prisons,  scourging,  knouts,  executions, 
the  army  and  war  were  what  ought  to  be — we  know  now 
that  one  can  seldom  find  a man  who  believes  that  all  these 


rs  WITHIN-  YON." 


rgi 

means  of  violence  preserve  anyone  from  any  evil  whatever, 
and  indeed  does  not  clearly  perceive  that  most  of  these 
acts  of  violence  to  which  he  is  exposed,  and  in  which  he 
has  some  share,  are  in  themselves  a great  and  useless  evil. 

There  is  no  one  to-day  who  does  not  see  the  uselessness 
and  injustice  of  collecting  taxes  from  the  toiling  masses 
to  enrich  idle  officials  ; or  the  senselessness  of  inflicting 
punishments  on  weak  or  depraved  persons  in  the  shape  of 
transportation  from  one  place  to  another,  or  of  imprison- 
ment in  a fortress  where,  living  in  security  and  indolence, 
they  only  become  weaker  and  more  depraved  ; or  the  worse 
than  uselessness  and  injustice,  the  positive  insanity  and 
barbarity  of  preparations  for  war  and  of  wars,  causing 
devastation  and  ruin,  and  having  no  kind  of  justification. 
Yet  these  forms  of  violence  continue  and  are  supported  by 
the  very  people  who  see  their  uselessness,  injustice,  and 
cruelty,  and  suffer  from  them.  If  fifty  years  ago  the  idle 
rich  man  and  the  illiterate  laborer  were  both  alike  con- 
vinced that  their  state  of  everlasting  holiday  for  one  and 
everlasting  toil  for  the  other  was  ordained  by  God  himself, 
we  know  very  well  that  nowadays,  thanks  to  the  growth  of 
population  and  the  diffusion  of  books  and  education,  it 
would  be  hard  to  find  in  Europe  or  even  in  Russia,  either 
among  rich  or  poor,  a man  to  whom  in  one  shape  or  another 
a doubt  as  to  the  justice  of  this  state  of  things  had  never 
presented  itself.  The  rich  know  that  they  are  guilty  in  the 
very  fact  of  being  rich,  and  try  to  expiate  their  guilt  by 
sacrifices  to  art  and  science,  as  of  old  they  expiated  their 
sins  by  sacrifices  to  the  Church.  And  even  the  larger  half 
of  the  working  people  openly  declare  that  the  existing 
order  is  iniquitous  and  bound  to  be  destroyed  or  reformed. 
One  set  of  religious  people  of  whom  there  are  millions  in 
Russia,  the  so-called  sectaries,  consider  the  existing  social 
order  as  unjust  and  to  be  destroyed  on  the  ground  of  the 
Gospel  teaching  taken  in  its  true  sense.  Others  regard  it 


192 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


as  unjust  on  the  ground  of  the  socialistic,  communistic,  or 
anarchistic  theories,  which  are  springing  up  in  the  lower 
strata  of  the  working  people.  Violence  no  longer  rests  on 
the  belief  in  its  utility,  but  only  on  the  fact  of  its  having 
existed  so  long,  and  being  organized  by  the  ruling  classes 
who  profit  by  it,  so  that  those  who  are  under  their  authority 
cannot  extricate  themselves  from  it.  The  governments  of 
our  day — all  of  them,  the  most  despotic  and  the  liberal 
alike — have  become  what  Herzen  so  well  called  “ Ghenghis 
Khan  with  the  telegraph  ; ” that  is  to  say,  organizations  of 
violence  based  on  no  principle  but  the  grossest  tyranny, 
and  at  the  same  time  taking  advantage  of  all  the  means 
invented  by  science  for  the  peaceful  collective  social 
activity  of  free  and  equal  men,  used  by  them  to  enslave 
and  oppress  their  fellows. 

r Governments  and  the  ruling  classes  no  longer  take  their 
stand  on  right  or  even  on  the  semblance  of  justice,  but  on 
a skillful  organization  carried  to  such  a point  of  perfection 
by  the  aid  of  science  that  everyone  is  caught  in  the  circle 
of  violence  and  has  no  chance  of  escaping  from  it.  This 
circle  is  made  up  now  of  four  methods  of  working  upon 
men,  joined  together  like  the  links  of  a chain  ring. 

The  first  and  oldest  method  is  intimidation.  This  con- 
sists in  representing  the  existing  state  organization — what- 
ever it  may  be,  free  republic  or  the  most  savage  des- 
potism— as  something  sacred  and  immutable,  and  therefore 
following  any  efforts  to  alter  it  with  the  cruellest  punish- 
ments. This  method  is  in  use  now — as  it  has  been  from 
olden  times — wherever  there  is  a government  : in  Russia 
against  the  so-called  Nihilists,  in  America  against  Anarch- 
ists, in  France  against  Imperialists,  Legitimists,  Com- 
munards, and  Anarchists. 

Railways,  telegraphs,  telephones,  photographs,  and  the 
great  perfection  of  the  means  of  getting  rid  of  men  for 
years,  without  killing  them,  by  solitary  confinement,  where. 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


T93 


hidden  from  the  world,  they  perish  and  are  forgotten,  and 
the  many  other  modern  inventions  employed  by  govern- 
ment, give  such  power  that  when  once  authority  has  come 
into  certain  hands,  the  police,  open  and  secret,  the  admin- 
istration and  prosecutors,  jailers  and  executioners  of  all 
kinds,  do  their  work  so  zealously  that  there  is  no  chance  of 
overturning  the  government,  however  cruel  and  senseless  it 
may  be. 

Jhe  second  method  is  corruption.  It  consists  in  plun- 
dering  the  industrious 'w6'rking“'people  of  their  wealth  by 
means  of  taxes  and  distributing  it  in  satisfying  the  greed  of 
officials,  who  are  bound  in  return  to  support  and  keep  up 
the  oppression  of  the  people.  These  bought  officials,  from 
the  highest  ministers  to  the  poorest  copying  clerks,  make 
up  an  unbroken  network  of  men  bound  together  by  the 
same  interest — that  of  living  at  the  expense  of  the  people. 
They  become  the  richer  the  more  submissively  they  carry 
out  the  will  of  the  government ; and  at  all  times  and  places, 
sticking  at  nothing,  in  all  departments  support  by  word  and 
deed  the  violence  of  government,  on  which  their  own  pros- 
perity also  rests. 

The  third- method  is  what  I can  only  describe  as  hypno- 
tizing  the  people.  This  consists  in  checking  the  moral 
development  of  men,  and  by  various  suggestions  keeping 
them  back  in  the  ideal  of  life,  outgrown  by  mankind  at 
large,  on  which  the  power  of  government  rests.  This 
hypnotizing  process  is  organized  at  the  present  in  the  most 
complex  manner,  and  starting  from  their  earliest  childhood, 
continues  to  act  on  men  till  the  day  of  their  death.  It 
begins  in  their  earliest  years  in  the  compulsory  schools, 
created  for  this  purpose,  in  which  the  children  have  in- 
stilled into  them  the  ideas  of  life  of  their  ancestors,  which 
are  in  direct  antagonism  with  the  conscience  of  the  modern 
world.  In  countries  where  there  is  a state  religion,  they 
teach  the  children  the  senseless  blasphemies  of  the  Church 


194 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  COD 


catechisms,  together  with  the  duty  of  obedience  to  their 
superiors.  In  republican  states  they  teach  them  the  savage 
superstition  of  patriotism  and  the  same  pretended  obedi- 
ence to  the  governing  authorities. 

The  process  is  kept  up  during  later  years  by  the  en- 
couragement  of  religious  and  patriotic  superstitions. 

The  religious  superstition  is  encouraged  by  establish- 
ing, with  money  taken  from  the  people,  temples,  proces- 
sions, memorials,  and  festivals,  which,  aided  by  painting, 
architecture,  music,  and  incense,  intoxicate  the  people,  and 
above  all  by  the  support  of  the  clergy,  whose  duty  consists 
in  brutalizing  the  people  and  keeping  them  in  a permanent 
state  of  stupefaction  by  their  teaching,  the  solemnity  of 
their  services,  their  sermons,  and  their  interference  in  pri- 
vate life— at  births,  deaths,  and  marriages.  The  patriotic 
superstition  is  encouraged  by  the  creation,  with  money 
taken  from  the  people,  of  national  fetes,  spectacles,  monu- 
ments, and  festivals  to  dispose  men  to  attach  importance  to 
their  own  nation,  and  to  the  aggrandizement  of  the  state  and 
its  rulers,  and  to  feel  antagonism  and  even  haired  for  other 
nations.  With  these  objects  under  despotic  governments 
there  is  direct  prohibition  against  printing  and  disseminat- 
ing books  to  enlighten  the  people,  and  everyone  who  might 
rouse  the  people  from  their  lethargy  is  exiled  or  imprisoned. 
Moreover,  under  every  government  without  exception 
everything  is  kept  back  that  might  emancipate  and  every- 
thing encouraged  that  tends  to  corrupt  the  people,  such  as 
literary  works  tending  to  keep  them  in  the  barbarism  of 
religious  and  patriotic  superstition,  all  kinds  of  sensual 
amusements,  spectacles,  circuses,  theaters,  and  even  the 
physical  means  of  inducing  stupefaction,  as  tobacco  and 
alcohol,  which  form  the  principal  source  of  revenue  of 
states.  Even  prostitution  is  encouraged,  and  not  only 
recognized,  but  even  organized  by  the  government  in  the 
majority  of  states.  So  much  for  the  third  method. 


IS  WITHIN-  YOU." 


195 


The  fourth  method  consists  in  selecting  from  all  the  men 
who  have  been -stupefied  and  enslaved  by  the  three  former 
methods  a certain  number,  exposing  them  to  special  and 
intensified  means  of  stupefaction  and  brutalization,  and  so 
making  them  into  a passive  instrument  for  carrying  out  all 
the  cruelties  and  brutalities  needed  by  the  government. 
This  result  is  attained  by  taking  them  at  the  youthful  age 
when  men  have  not  had  time  to  form  clear  and  definite 
principles  of  morals,  and  removing  them  from  all  natui'al 
and  human  conditions  of  life,  home,  family  and  kindred, 
and  useful  labor.  They  are  shut  up  together  in  barracks, 
dressed  in  special  c’othes,  and  worked  upon  by  cries,  drums, 
music,  and  shining  objects  to  go  through  certain  daily 
actions  invented  for  this  purpose,  and  by  this  means  are 
brought  into  an  hypnotic  condition  in  which  they  cease  to 
be  men  and  become  mere  senseless  machines,  submissive 
to  the  hypnotizer.  These  physically  vigorous  young  men 
(in  these  days  of  universal  conscription,  all  young  men), 
hypnotized,  armed  with  murderous  weapons,  always 
obedient  to  the  governing  authorities  and  ready  for  any 
act  of  violence  at  their  command,  constitute  the  fourth  and 
principal  method  of  enslaving  men. 

By  this  method  the  circle  of  violence  is  completed. 

Intimidation,  corruption,  and  hypnotizing  bring  people 
into  a condition  in  which  they  are  willing  to  be  soldiers  ; 
the  soldiers  give  the  power  of  punishing  and  plundering 
them  (and  purchasing  officials  with  the  spoils),  and  hyp- 
notizing them  and  converting  them  in  time  into  these 
same  soldiers  again.  ^ 

Tlie  circle  is  complete,  ai^there  is  no  chance  of  break- 
ing through  it  by  force. 

Some  persons  maintain  that  freedom  from  violence,  or 
at  least  a great  diminution  of  it,  may  be  gained  by  the 
oppressed  forcibly  overturning  the  oppressive  government 
and  replacing  it  by  a new  one  under  which  such  violence 


196 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


and  oppression  will  be  unnecessary,  but  they  deceive  them- 
selves and  others,  and  their  efforts  do  not  better  the  posi- 
tion of  the  oppressed,  but  only  make  it  worse.  Their  con- 
duct only  tends  to  increase  the  despotism  of  government. 
Their  efforts  only  afford  a plausible  pretext  for  government 
to  strengthen  their  power. 

Even  if  we  admit  that  under  a combination  of  circum- 
stances specially  unfavorable  for  the  government,  as  in 
France  in  1870,  any  government  might  be  forcibl}"  over- 
turned and  the  power  transferred  to  other  hands,  the  new 
authority  would  rarely  be  less  oppressive  than  the  old  one  ; 
on  the  contrary,  always  having  to  defend  itself  against  its 
dispossessed  and  exasperated  enemies,  it  would  be  more 
despotic  and  cruel,  as  has  always  been  the  rule  in  all 
revolutions. 

While  socialists  and  communists  regard  the  individual, 
istic,  capitalistic  organization  of  society  as  an  evil,  and  the 
anarchists  regard  as  an  evil  all  government  whatever,  there 
are  royalists,  conservatives,  and  capitalists  who  consider 
any  socialistic  or  communistic  organization  or  anarchy  as 
an  evil,  and  all  these  parties  have  no  means  other  than 
violence  to  bring  men  to  agreement.  Whichever  of  these 
parties  were  successful  in  bringing  their  schemes  to  pass, 
must  resort  to  support  its  authority  to  all  the  existing 
methods  of  violence,  and  even  invent  new  ones. 

The  oppressed  would  be  another  set  of  people,  and 
coercion  would  take  some  new  form  ; but  the  violence  and 
oppression  would  be  unchanged  or  even  more  cruel,  since 
hatred  would  be  intensified  by  the  struggle,  and  new  forms 
of  oppression  would  have  been  devised.  So  it  has  always 
been  after  all  revolutions  and  all  attempts  at  revolution,  all 
conspiracies,  and  all  violent  changes  of  government. 
Every  conflict  only  strengthens  the  means  of  oppression  in 
the  hands  of  those  who  happen  at  a given  moment  to  be  in 
power. 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


197 


The  position  of  our  Christian  society,  and  especially  the 
ideals  most  current  in  it,  prove  this  in  a strikingly  convinc- 
ing way. 

There  remains  now  only  one  sphere  of  human  life  not 
encroached  upon  by  government  authority — that  is  the 
domestic,  economic  sphere,  the  sphere  of  private  life  and 
labor.  And  even  this  is  now — thanks  to  the  efforts  of  com- 
munists and  socialists — being  gradually  encroached  upon 
by  government,  so  that  labor  and  recreation,  dwellings, 
dress,  and  food  will  gradually,  if  the  hopes  of  the  reformers 
are  successful,  be  prescribed  and  regulated  by  government. 

The  slow  progress  of  eighteen  centuries  has  brought  the 
Christian  nations  again  to  the  necessity  of  deciding  the 
question  they  have  evaded — the  question  of  the  acceptance 
or  non-acceptance  of  Christ’s  teaching,  and  the  question 
following  upon  it  in  social  life  of  resistance  or  non-resist- 
ance to  evil  by  force.  But  there  is  this  difference,  that 
whereas  formerly  men  could  accept  or  refu.se  to  accept  the 
solution  given  by  Christ,  now  that  solution  cannot  be 
avoided,  since  it  alone  can  save  men  from  the  slavery  in 
which  they  are  caught  like  a net. 

But  it  is  not  only  the  misery  of  the  position  which  makes 
this  inevitable. 

While  the  pagan  organization  has  been  proved  more  and 
more  false,  the  truth  of  the  Christian  religion  has  been 
growing  more  and  more  evident. 

Not  in  vain  have  the  best  men  of  Christian  humanity, 
who  apprehended  the  truth  by  spiritual  intuition,  for 
eighteen  centuries  testified  to  it  in  spite  of  every  menace, 
every  privation,  and  every  suffering.  By  their  martyrdom 
they  passed  on  the  truth  to  the  masses,  and  impressed  it  on 
their  hearts. 

Christianity  has  penetrated  into  the  consciousness  of 
humanity,  not  only  negatively  by  the  demonstration  of  the 
impossibility  of  continuing  in  the  pagan  life,  but  also 


198 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


through  its  simplification,  its  increased  clearness  and  free- 
dom from  the  superstitions  intermingled  with  it,  and  its 
diffusion  through  all  classes  of  the  population. 

Eighteen  centuries  of  Christianity  have  not  passed  with- 
out an  effect  even  on  those  who  accepted  it  only  externally. 
These  eighteen  centuries  have  brought  men  so  far  that  even 
while  they  continue  to  live  the  pagan  life  which  is  no  longer 
consistent  with  the  development  of  humanity,  they  not  only 
see  clearly  all  the  wretchedness  of  their  position,  but  in 
the  depths  of  their  souls  they  believe  (they  can  only  live 
through  this  belief)  that  the  only  salvation  from  this  posi- 
tion is  to  be  found  in  fulfilling  the  Christian  doctrine  in  its 
true  significance.  As  to  the  time  and  manner  of  salvation, 
opinions  are  divided  according  to  the  intellectual  develop- 
ment and  the  prejudices  of  each  society.  But  every  man 
of  the  modern  world  recognizes  that  our  salvation  lies  in 
fulfilling  the  law  of  Christ.  Some  believers  in  the  super- 
natural character  of  Christianity  hold  that  salvation  will 
come  when  all  men  are  brought  to  believe  in  Christ,  whose 
second  coming  is  at  hand.  Other  believers  in  supernatural 
Christianity  hold  that  salvation  will  come  through  the 
Church,  which  will  draw  all  men  into  its  fold,  train  them  in 
the  Christian  virtues,  and  transform  their  life.  A third 
section,  who  do  not  admit  the  divinity  of  Christ,  hold  that 
the  salvation  of  mankind  will  be  brought  about  by  slow 
and  gradual  progress,  through  which  the  pagan  principles 
of  our  existence  will  be  replaced  by  the  principles  of  libert)^ 
equality,  and  fraternity — that  is,  by  Christian  principles. 
A fourth  section,  who  believe  in  the  social  revolution,  hold 
that  salvation  will  come  when  through  a violent  revolution 
men  are  forced  into  community  of  property,  abolition  of 
government, and  collective  instead  of  individual  industry — 
that  is  to  say,  the  realization  of  one  side  of  the  Christian 
doctrine.  In  one  way  or  another  all  men  of  our  day  in 
their  inner  consciousness  condemn  the  existing  effete 


/S  WITHIN  YOU." 


199 


pagan  order,  and  admit,  often  unconsciously  and  while 
regarding  themselves  as  hostile  to  Christianity,  that  our 
salvation  is  only  to  be  found  in  the  application  of  the  Chris- 
tian doctrine,  or  parts  of  it,  in  its  true  significance  to  our 
daily  life. 

Christianity  cannot,  as  its  Founder  said,  be  realized  by 
the  majority  of  men  all  at  once  ; it  must  grow  like  a huge 
tree  from  a tiny  seed.  And  so  it  has  grown,  and  now  has 
reached  its  full  development,  not  yet  in  actual  life,  but  in 
the  conscience  of  men  of  to-day. 

Now  not  only  the  minority,  who  have  always  compre- 
hended Christianity  by  spiritual  intuition,  but  all  the  vast 
majority  who  seem  so  far  from  it  in  their  social  existence 
recognize  its  true  significance. 

Look  at  individual  men  in  their  private  life,  listen  to  their 
standards  of  conduct  in  their  judgment  of  one  another; 
hear  not  only  their  public  utterances,  but  the  counsels 
given  by  parents  and  guardians  to  the  young  in  their 
charge  ; and  you  will  see  that,  far  as  their  social  life  based 
on  violence  may  be  from  realizing  Christian  truth,  in  their 
private  life  what  is  considered  good  by  all  without  excep- 
tion is  nothing  but  the  Christian  virtues  ; what  is  con- 
sidered as  bad  is  nothing  but  the  antichristian  vices. 
Those  who  consecrate  their  lives  self-sacrificingly  to  the 
service  of  humanity  are  regarded  as  the  best  men.  The 
selfish,  who  make  use  of  the  misfortunes  of  others  for  their 
own  advantage,  are  regarded  as  the  worst  of  men. 

Though  some  non-Christian  ideals,  such  as  strength, 
courage,  and  wealth,  are  still  worshiped  by  a few  who  have 
not  been  penetrated  by  the  Christian  spirit,  these  ideals 
are  out  of  date  and  are  abandoned,  if  not  by  all,  at  least 
by  all  those  regarded  as  the  best  people.  There  are  no 
ideals,  other  than  the  Christian  ideals,  which  are  accepted 
by  all  and  regarded  as  binding  on  all. 

The  position  of  our  Christian  humanity,  if  you  look  at  it 


200 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


from  the  outside  with  all  its  cruelty  and  degradation  of 
men,  is  terrible  indeed.  But  if  one  looks  at  it  within,  in  its 
inner  consciousness,  the  spectacle  it  presents  is  absolutely 
different. 

All  the  evil  of  our  life  seems  to  exist  only  because  it  has 
been  so  for  so  long  ; those  who  do  the  evil  have  not  had 
time  yet  to  learn  how  to  act  otherwise,  though  they  do  not 
want  to  act  as  they  do. 

All  the  evil  seems  to  exist  through  some  cause  inde- 
pendent of  the  conscience  of  men. 

Strange  and  contradictory  as  it  seems,  all  men  of  the 
present  day  hate  the  very  social  order  they  are  themselves 
supporting. 

I think  it  is  Max  Muller  who  describes  the  amazement  of 
an  Indian  convert  to  Christianity,  who  after  absorbing  the 
essence  of  the  Christian  doctrine  came  to  Europe  and  saw 
the  actual  life  of  Christians.  He  could  not  recover  from 
his  astonishment  at  the  complete  contrast  between  the 
reality  and  what  he  had  expected  to  find  among  Christian 
nations.  If  we  feel  no  astonishment  at  the  contrast  between 
our  convictions  and  our  conduct,  that  is  because  the  influ- 
ences, tending  to  obscure  the  contrast,  produce  an  effect 
upon  us  too.  We  need  only  look  at  our  life  from  the  point 
of  view  of  that  Indian,  who  understood  Christianity  in  its 
true  significance,  without  any  compromises  or  concessions, 
we  need  but  look  at  the  savage  brutalities  of  which  our  life 
is  full,  to  be  appalled  at  the  contradictions  in  the  midst  of 
which  we  live  often  without  observing  them. 

We  need  only  recall  the  preparations  for  war,  the  mitrail- 
leuses, the  silver-gilt  bullets,  the  torpedoes,  and — the  Red 
Cross  ; the  solitary  prison  cells,  the  experiments  of  execu- 
tion by  electricity — and  the  care  of  the  hygienic  welfare  of 
prisoners ; the  philanthropy  of  the  rich,  and  their  life, 
which  produces  the  poor  they  are  benefiting. 

And  these  inconsistencies  are  not,  as  it  might  seem, 


75  WITHIN  YOU .7  20 i 

because  men  pretend  to  be  Christians  while  they  are  really 
pagans,  but  because  of  so.aietliing  lacking  in  men,  or  some 
kind  of  force  hindering  them  from  being  what  they  already 
feel  themselves  to  be  in  their  consciousness,  and  what  they 
genuinely  wish  to  be.  Men  of  the  present  day  do  not 
merely  pretend  to  hate  oppression,  inequality,  class  dis- 
tinction, and  every  kind  of  cruelty  to  animals  as  well  as 
human  beings.  They  genuinely  detest  all  this,  but  they  do 
not  know  how  to  put  a stop  to  it,  or  perhaps  cannot  decide 
to  give  up  what  preserves  it  all,  and  seems  to  them 
necessary. 

Indeed,  ask  every  man  separately  whether  he  thinks  it 
laudable  and  worthy  of  a man  of  this  age  to  hold  a position 
from  which  he  receives  a salary  disproportionate  to  his 
work  ; to  take  from  the  people — often  in  poverty — taxes  to 
be  spent  on  constructing  cannon,  torpedoes,  and  other 
instruments  of  butchery,  so  as  to  make  war  on  people  with 
whom  we  wish  to  be  at  peace,  and  who  feel  the  same  wish 
in  regard  to  us  ; or  to  receive  a salary  for  devoting  one’s 
whole  life  to  constructing  these  instruments  of  butchery,  or 
to  preparing  oneself  and  others  for  the  work  of  murder. 
And  ask  him  whether  it  is  laudable  and  worthy  of  a man, 
and  suitable  for  a Christian,  to  employ  himself,  for  a salary, 
in  seizing  wretched,  misguided,  often  illiterate  and  drunken, 
creatures  because  they  appropriate  the  property  of  others — 
on  a much  smaller  scale  than  we  do — or  because  they  kill 
men  in  a different  fashion  from  that  in  which  we  undertake 
to  do  it — and  shutting  them  in  prison  for  it,  ill  treating 
them  and  killing  them  ; and  whether  it  is  laudable  and 
worthy  of  a man  and  a Christian  to  preach  for  a salary  to 
the  people  not  Christianit}^  but  superstitions  which  one 
knows  to  be  stupid  and  pernicious;  and  whether  it  is 
laudable  and  worthy  of  a man  to  rob  his  neighbor  for  his 
gratification  of  what  he  wants  to  satisfy  his  simplest  needs, 
as  the  great  landowners  do  ; or  to  force  him  to  exhaust- 


202 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  COD 


ing  labor  beyond  his  strength  to  augment  one’s  wealth,  as 
do  factory  owners  and  manufacturers  ; or  to  profit  by  the 
poverty  of  men  to  increase  one’s  gains,  as  merchants  do. 
And  everyone  taken  separately,  especially  if  one’s  remarks 
are  directed  at  someone  else,  not  himself,  will  answer.  No! 
And  yet  the  very  man  who  sees  all  the  baseness  of  those 
actions,  of  his  own  free  will,  uncoerced  by  anyone,  often 
even  for  no  pecuniary  profit,  but  only  from  childish  vanity, 
for  a china  cross,  a scrap  of  ribbon,  a bit  of  fringe  he  is 
allowed  to  wear,  will  enter  military  service,  become  a 
magistrate  or  justice  of  the  peace,  commissioner,  arch- 
bishop, or  beadle,  though  in  fulfilling  these  offices  he  must 
commit  acts  the  baseness  and  shamefulness  of  which  he 
cannot  fail  to  recognize. 

I know  that  many  of  these  men  will  confidently  try  to 
prove  that  they  have  reasons  for  regarding  their  position 
as  legitimate  and  quite  indispensable.  They  will  say  in 
their  defense  that  authority  is  given  by  God,  that  the 
functions  of  the  state  are  indispensable  for  the  welfare  of 
humanity,  that  property  is  not  opposed  to  Christianity, 
that  the  rich  young  man  was  only  corhmanded  to  sell  all 
he  had  and  give  to  the  poor  if  he  wished  to  be  perfect, 
that  the  existing  distribution  of  property  and  our  commer- 
cial system  must  always  remain  as  they  are,  and  are  to  the 
advantage  of  all,  and  so  on.  But,  however  much  they  try 
to  deceive  themselves  and  others,  they  all  know  that  what 
they  are  doing  is  opposed  to  all  the  beliefs  which  they  pro- 
fess, and  in  the  depths  of  their  souls,  when  they  are  left 
alone  with  their  conscience,  they  are  ashamed  and  miser- 
able at  the  recollection  of  it,  especially  if  the  baseness  of 
their  action  has  been  pointed  out  to  them.  A man  of  the 
present  day,  whether  he  believes  in  the  divinity  of  Christ 
or  not,  cannot  fail  to  see  that  to  assist  in  the  capacity  of 
tzar,  minister,  governor,  or  commissioner  in  taking  from  a 
poor  family  its  last  cow  for  taxes  to  be  spent  on  cannons. 


75  WITHIN  YOU. 


203 


or  on  the  pay  and  pensions  of  idle  officials,  who  live  in 
luxury  and  are  worse  than  useless  ; or  in  putting  into 
prison  some  man  we  have  ourselves  corrupted,  and  throw- 
ing his  family  on  the  streets ; or  in  plundering  and 
butchering  in  war  ; or  in  inculcating  savage  and  idolatrous 
superstitions  in  the  place  of  the  law  of  Christ  ; or  in 
impounding  the  cow  found  on  one’s  land,  though  it  belongs 
to  a man  who  has  no  land  ; or  to  cheat  the  workman  in  a 
factory,  by  imposing  fines  for  accidentally  spoiled  articles  ; 
or  making  a poor  man  pay  double  the  value  for  anything 
simply  because  he  is  in  the  direst  poverty  ; — not  a man  of 
the  present  day  can  fail  to  know  that  all  these  actions  are 
base  and  disgraceful,  and  that  they  need  not  do  them. 
They  all  know  it.  They  know  that  what  they  are  doing  is 
wrong,  and  would  not  do  it  for  anything  in  the  world  if 
they  had  the  power  of  resisting  the  forces  which  shut  their 
eyes  to  the  criminality  of  their  actions  and  impel  them  to 
commit  them. 

In  nothing  is  the  pitch  of  inconsistency  modern  life  has 
attained  to  so  evident  as  in  universal  conscription,  which  is 
the  last  resource  and  the  final  expression  of  violence. 

Indeed,  it  is  only  because  this  state  of  universal  arma- 
ment has  been  brought  about  gradually  and  imperceptibly, 
and  because  governments  have  exerted,  in  maintaining  it, 
every  resource  of  intimidation,  corruption,  brutalization,  and 
violence,  that  we  do  not  see  its  flagrant  inconsistency  with 
the  Christian  ideas  and  sentiments  by  which  the  modern 
world  is  permeated. 

We  are  so  accustomed  to  the  inconsistency  that  we  do 
not  see  all  the  hideous  folly  and  immorality  of  men  volun- 
tarily choosing  the  profession  of  butchery  as  though  it  were 
an  honorable  career,  of  poor  wretches  submitting  to  con- 
scription, or  in  countries  where  compulsory  service  has  not 
been  introduced,  of  people  voluntarily  abandoning  a life  of 
industry  to  recruit  soldiers  and  train  them  as  murderers. 


204 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


We  know  that  all  of  these  men  are  either  Christians,  or  pro- 
fess humane  and  liberal  principles,  and  they  know  that  they 
thusbecome  partly  responsible — through  universal  conscrip- 
tion, personally  responsible — for  the  most  insane,  aimless, 
and  brutal  murders.  And  yet  they  all  do  it. 

More  than  that,  in  Germany,  where  compulsory  service 
first  orginated,  Caprivi  has  given  expression  to  what  had 
been  hitherto  so  assiduously  concealed — that  is,  that  the 
men  that  the  soldiers  will  have  to  kill  are  not  foreigners 
alone,  but  their  own  countrymen,  the  very  working  people 
from  whom  they  themselves  are  taken.  And  this  admission 
has  not  opened  people’s  eyes,  has  not  horrified  them  ! They 
still  go  like  sheep  to  the  slaughter,  and  submit  to  every- 
thing required  of  them. 

Aud  that  is  not  all  : the  Emperor  of  Germany  has  lately 
shown  still  more  clearly  the  duties  of  the  army,  by  thank- 
ing and  rewarding  a soldier  for  killing  a defenseless  citizen 
who  made  his  approach  incautiously.  By  rewarding  an 
action  always  regarded  as  base  and  cowardly  even  by  men 
on  the  lowest  level  of  morality,  William  has  shown  that 
a soldier’s  chief  duty — the  one  most  appreciated  by  the 
authorities — is  that  of  executioner  ; and  not  a professional 
executioner  who  kills  only  condemned  criminals,  but  one 
ready  to  butcher  any  innocent  man  at  the  word  of  com- 
mand. 

And  even  that  is  not  all.  In  1892,  the  same  William, 
the  eijf  ant  terrible  of  state  authority,  who  says  plainly  what 
other  people  only  think,  in  addressing  some  soldiers  gave 
public  utterance  to  the  following  speech,  which  was 
reported  next  day  in  thousands  of  newspapers  : “ Con- 

scripts ! ” he  said,  “ you  have  sworn  fidelity  to  me  before 
the  altar  and  the  minister  of  God  ! You  are  still  too 
young  to  understand  all  the  importance  of  what  has  been 
said  here  ; let  your  care  before  all  things  be  to  obey  the 
orders  and  instructions  given  you.  You  have  sworn 


JS  YOU. 


205 


fidelity  to  me,  lads  of  my  guard  ; that  means  that  yon  are 
now  my  soldiers,  you  have  given  yourselves  to  me  body  and 
soul.  For  you  there  is  now  but  one  enemy,  7ny  enemy. 
In  these  days  of  socialistic  sedition  it  may  come  to  pass  that 
I connnand  you  to  fire  on  your  own  kindred,  your  brothers, 
even  your  own  fathers  and  77iothers — which  God  forbid  ! — 
even  then  you  are  bound  to  obey  my  orders  without 
hesitation.” 

This  man  expresses  what  all  sensible  rulers  think,  but 
studiously  conceal.  He  says  openly  that  the  soldiers  are 
in  his  service,  at  his  disposal,  and  must  be  ready  for  his 
advantage  to  murder  even  their  brothers  and  fathers. 

In  the  most  brutal  words  he  frankly  exposes  all  the 
horrors  and  criminality  for  which  men  prepare  themselves 
in  entering  the  army,  and  the  depths  of  ignominy  to  which 
they  fall  in  promising  obedience.  Like  a bold  hypnotizer, 
he  tests  the  degree  of  insensibility  of  the  hypnotized  sub- 
ject. He  touches  his  skin  with  a red-hot  iron  ; the  skin 
smokes  and  scorches,  but  the  sleeper  does  not  awake. 

This  miserable  man,  imbecile  and  drunk  with  power, 
outrages  in  this  utterance  everything  that  can  be  sacred 
for  a man  of  the  modern  world.  And  yet  all  the  Chris- 
tians, liberals,  and  cultivated  people,  far  from  resenting 
this  outrage,  did  not  even  observe  it. 

The  last,  the  most  extreme  test  is  put  before  men  in  its 
coarsest  form.  And  they  do  not  seem  even  to  notice  that 
it  is  a test,  that  there  is  any  choice  about  it.  They  seem 
to  think  there  is  no  course  open  but  slavish  submission. 
One  would  have  thought  these  insane  words,  which  out- 
rage everything  a man  of  the  present  day  holds  sacred, 
must  rouse  indignation.  But  there  has  been  nothing  of 
the  kind. 

All  the  young  men  through  the  whole  of  Europe  are  ex- 
posed year  after  year  to  this  test,  and  with  very  few  excep- 
tions they  renounce  all  that  a man  can  hold  sacred,  all 


2o6 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


express  their  readiness  to  kill  their  brothers,  even  their 
fathers,  at  the  bidding  of  the  first  crazy  creature  dressed 
up  in  a livery  with  red  and  gold  trimming,  and  only  wait 
to  be  told  where  and  when  they  are  to  kill.  And  they  ac- 
tually are  ready. 

Every  savage  has  something  he  holds  sacred,  something 
for  which  he  is  ready  to  suffer,  something  he  will  not  con- 
sent to  do.  But  what  is  it  that  is  sacred  to  the  civilized 
man  of  to-day?  They  say  to  him:  “You  must  become 
my  slave,  and  this  slavery  may  force  you  to  kill  even  your 
own  father  ; “ and  he,  often  very  well  educated,  trained  in 
all  the  sciences  at  the  university,  quietly  puts  his  head 
under  the  yoke.  They  dress  him  up  in  a clown’s  costume, 
and  order  him  to  cut  capers,  turn  and  twist  and  bow,  and 
kill — he  does  it  all  submissively.  And  when  they  let  him 
go,  he  seems  to  shake  himself  and  go  back  to  his  former 
life,  and  he  continues  to  discourse  upon  the  dignity  of  man, 
liberty,  equality,  and  fraternity  as  before. 

“Yes,  but  what  is  one  to  do  ? ’’  people  often  ask  in  gen- 
uine perplexity.  “ If  everyone  would  stand  out  it  would 
be  something,  but  by  myself,  I shall  only  suffer  without 
doing  any  good  to  anyone.” 

And  that  is  true.  A man  with  the  social  conception  of 
life  cannot  resist.  The  aim  of  his  life  is  his  personal  wel- 
fare. It  is  better  for  his  personal  welfare  for  him  to  submit, 
and  he  submits. 

Whatever  they  do  to  him,  however  they  torture  or  hu- 
miliate him,  he  will  submit,  for,  alone,  he  can  do  nothing  ; 
he  has  no  principle  for  the  sake  of  which  he  could  resist 
violence  alone.  And  those  who  control  them  never  allow 
them  to  unite  together.  It  is  often  said  that  the  invention 
of  terrible  weapons  of  destruction  will  put  an  end  to  war. 
That  is  an  error.  As  the  means  of  extermination  are  im- 
proved, the  means  of  reducing  men  who  hold  the  state 
conception  of  life  to  submission  can  be  improved  to  cor- 


/S  WITHIN  YOU. 


207 


respond.  They  may  slaughter  them  by  thousands,  by 
millions,  they  may  tear  them  to  pieces,  still  they  will  march 
to  war  like  senseless  cattle.  Some  will  want  beating  to 
make  them  move,  others  will  be  proud  to  go  if  they  are 
allowed  to  wear  a scrap  of  ribbon  or  gold  lace. 

And  of  this  mass  of  men  so  brutalized  as  to  be  ready  to 
promise  to  kill  their  own  parents,  the  social  reformers — | 
conservatives,  liberals,  socialists,  and  anarchists — propose  i 
to  form  a rational  and  moral  society.  What  sort  of  moral  ; 
and  rational  society  can  be  formed  out  of  such  elements?  | 
With  warped  and  rotten  planks  you  cannot  build  a house,  \ 
however  you  put  them  together.  And  to  form  a rational  ■ 
moral  society  of  such  men  is  just  as  impossible  a task. 
They  can  be  formed  into  nothing  but  a herd  of  cattle, 
driven  by  the  shouts  and  whips  of  the  herdsmen.  As  in- 
deed they  are. 

So,  then,  we  have  on  one  side  men  calling  themselves 
Christians,  and  professing  the  principles  of  liberty,  equality, 
and  fraternity,  and  along  with  that  ready,  in  the  name  of 
liberty,  to  submit  to  the  most  slavish  degradation  ; in  the 
name  of  equality,  to  accept  the  crudest,  most  senseless 
division  of  men  by  externals  merely  into  higher  and  lower 
classes,  allies  and  enemies  ; and,  in  the  name  of  fraternity, 
ready  to  murder  their  brothers.* 

The  contradiction  between  life  and  conscience  and  the  \ 
misery  resulting  from  it  have  reached  the  extreme  limit  and  I 
can  go  no  further.  The  state  organization  of  life  based  on  1 
violence,  the  aim  of  which  was  the  security  of  personal,,  ' 
family,  and  social  welfare,  has  come  to  the  point  of  renounc- 

* The  fact  that  among  certain  nations,  as  the  English  and  the  Ameri- 
can, military  service  is  not  compulsory  (though  already  one  hears  there 
are  some  who  advocate  that  it  should  be  made  so)  does  not  affect  the 
servility  of  the  citizens  to  the  government  in  principle.  Here  we  have 
each  to  go  and  kill  or  be  killed,  there  they  have  each  to  give  the  fruit 
of  their  toil  to  pay  for  the  recruiting  and  training  of  soldiers. 


2o8 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


ing  the  very  objects  for  which  it  was  founded — it  has 
reduced  men  to  absolute  renunciation  and  loss  of  the 
welfare  it  was  to  secure. 

The  first  half  of  the  prophecy  has  been  fulfilled  in  the 
generation  of  men  who  have  not  accepted  Christ’s  teaching, 
Their  descendants  have  been  brought  now  to  the  absolute 
necessity  of  putting  the  truth  of  the  second  half  to  the  test 
of  experience. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE  ACCEPTANCE  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  CONCEPTION  OF  LIFE 
WILL  EMANCIPATE  MEN  FROM  THE  MISERIES  OF  OUR 
PAGAN  LIFE. 

The  External  Life  of  Christian  Peoples  Remains  Pagan  Though  they  are 
Penetrated  by  Christian  Consciousness — The  Way  Out  of  this  Contra- 
diction is  by  the  Acceptance  of  the  Christian  Theory  of  Life — Only 
Through  Christianity  is  Every  Man  Eree,  and  Emancipated  of  All 
Human  Authority — This  Emancipation  can  be  Effected  by  no  Change 
in  External  Conditions  of  Life,  but  Only  by  a Change  in  the  Concep- 
tion of  Life — The  Christian  Ideal  of  Life  Requires  Renunciation  of 
all  Violence,  and  in  Emancipating  the  Man  who  Accepts  it.  Emanci- 
pates the  Whole  World  from  All  External  Authorities — The  Way 
Out  of  the  Present  Apparently  Hopeless  Position  is  for  Every  Man 
who  is  Capable  of  Assimilating  the  Christian  Conception  of  Life,  to 
Accept  it  and  Live  in  Accordance  with  it — But  Men  Consider  this 
Way  too  Slow,  and  Look  for  Deliverance  Through  Changes  in  Material 
Conditions  of  Life  Aided  by  Government — That  Will  Lead  to  No 
Improvement,  as  it  is  simply  Increasing  the  Evil  under  which  Men 
are  Suffering — A Striking  Instance  of  this  is  the  Submission  to  Com- 
pulsory Military  Service,  which  it  would  be  More  Advantageous  for 
Every  Man  to  Refuse  than  to  Submit  to — The  Emancipation  of  Men 
Can  Only  be  Brought  About  by  each  Individual  Emancipating  Himself, 
and  the  Examples  of  this  Self-emancipation  which  are  already  Appear- 
ing Threaten  the  Destruction  of  Governmental  Authority — Refusal  to 
Comply  with  the  Unchristian  Demands  of  Government  Undermines  the 
Authority  of  the  State  and  Emancipates  Men — And  therefore  Cases 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


209 


of  such  Non-compliance  are  Regarded  with  more  Dread  by  State 
Authorities  than  any  Conspiracies  or  Acts  of  Violence — Examples  of 
Non-compliance  in  Russia,  in  Regard  to  Oath  of  Allegiance,  Pay- 
ment of  Taxes,  Passports,  Police  Duties,  and  Military  Service — 
Examples  of  such  Non-compliance  in  other  States— Governments  do 
not  Know  how  to  Treat  Men  who  Refuse  to  Comply  with  their 
Demands  on  Christian  Grounds — Such  People,  without  Striking  a 
Blow,  Undermine  the  very  Basis  of  Government  from  Within — To 
Punish  them  is  Equivalent  to  Openly  Renouncing  Christianity,  and 
Assisting  in  Diffusing  the  Very  Principle  by  which  these  Men  Justify 
their  Non-compliance — So  Governments  are  in  a Helpless  Position — 
Men  who  IMaintain  the  Uselessness  of  Personal  Independence,  only 
Retard  the  Dissolution  of  the  Present  State  Organization  Based  on 
Force. 


The  position  of  the  Christian  peoples  in  oiir  days  has 
remained  just  as  cruel  as  it  was  in  the  times  of  paganism. 
In  many  respects,  especially  in  the  oppression  of  the  masses, 
it  has  become  even  more  cruel  than  it  was  in  the  days  of 
paganism. 

But  between  the  condition  of  men  in  ancient  times  and 
their  condition  in  our  days  there  is  just  the  difference  that 
we  see  in  the  world  of  vegetation  between  the  last  days  of 
autumn  and  the  first  days  of  spring.  In  the  autumn  the 
external  lifelessness  in  nature  corresponds  with  its  inward 
condition  of  death,  while  in  the  spring  the  external  lifeless- 
ness is  in  sharp  contrast  with  the  internal  state  of  reviving 
and  passing  into  new  forms  of  life. 

In  the  same  way  the  similarity  between  the  ancient 
heathen  life  and  the  life  of  to-day  is  merely  external  : the 
inward  condition  of  men  in  the  times  of  heathenism  was 
absolutely  different  from  their  inward  condition  at  the 
present  time. 

Then  the  outward  condition  of  cruelty  and  of  slavery 
was  in  complete  harmony  with  the  inner  conscience  of  men, 
and  every  step  in  advance  intensified  this  harmony  ; now 
the  outward  condition  of  cruelty  and  of  slavery  is  com- 


210 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


pletely  contradictory  to  the  Christian  consciousness  of  men, 
and  every  step  in  advance  only  intensifies  this  contradic- 
tion. 

Humanity  is  passing  through  seemingly  unnecessary, 
fruitless  agonies.  It  is  passing  through  something  like  the 
throes  of  birth.  Everything  is  ready  for  the  new  life,  but 
still  the  new  life  does  not  come. 

There  seems  no  way  out  of  the  position.  And  there 
would  be  none,  except  that  a man  (and  thereby  all  men)  is 
gifted  with  the  power  of  forming  a different,  higher  theory 
of  life,  which  at  once  frees  him  from  all  the  bonds  by 
which  he  seems  indissolubly  fettered. 

And  such  a theory  is  the  Christian  view  of  life  made 
known  to  mankind  eighteen  hundred  years  ago. 

A man  need  only  make  this  theory  of  life  his  own,  for 
the  fetters  which  seemed  so  indissolubly  forged  upon  him 
to  drop  off  of  themselves,  and  for  him  to  feel  himself  abso- 
lutely free,  just  as  a bird  would  feel  itself  free  in  a fenced- 
in  place  directly  it  took  to  its  wings. 

People  talk  about  the  liberty  of  the  Christian  Church, 
about  giving  or  not  giving  freedom  to  Christians.  Under- 
lying all  these  ideas  and  expressions  there  is  some  strange 
misconception.  Freedom  cannot  be  bestowed  on  or  taken 
from  a Christian  or  Christians.  Freedom  is  an  inalienable 
possession  of  the  Christian. 

If  we  talk  of  bestowing  freedom  on  Christians  or  with- 
holding it  from  them,  we  are  obviously  talking  not  of  real 
Christians  but  of  people  who  only  call  themselves  Chris- 
tians. A Christian  cannot  fail  to  be  free,  because  the 
attainment  of  the  aim  he  sets  before  himself  cannot  be  pre- 
vented or  even  hindered  by  anyone  or  anything. 

Let  a man  only  understand  his  life  as  Christianity 
teaches  him  to  understand  it,  let  him  understand,  that  is, 
that  his  life  belongs  not  to  him — not  to  his  own  individual- 
ity, nor  to  his  family,  nor  to  the  state — but  to  him  who 


75  WITHIN  YOU. 


2II 


has  sent  him  into  the  world,  and  let  him  once  understand 
that  he  must  therefore  fulfill  not  the  law  of  his  own  indi- 
viduality, nor  his  family,  nor  of  the  state,  but  the  infinite 
law  of  him  from  whom  he  has  come  ; and  he  will  not  only 
feel  himself  absolutely  free  from  every  human  power,  but 
will  even  cease  to  regard  such  power  as  at  all  able  to 
hamper  anyone. 

Let  a man  but  realize  that  the  aim  of  his  life  is  the  fulfill- 
ment of  God’s  law,  and  that  law  will  replace  all  other  laws 
for  him,  and  he  will  give  it  his  sole  allegiance,  so  that  by 
that  very  allegiance  every  human  law  will  lose  all  binding 
and  controlling  power  in  his  eyes. 

The  Christian  is  independent  of  every  human  authority 
by  the  fact  that  he  regards  the  divine  law  of  love,  implanted 
in  the  soul  of  every  man,  and  brought  before  his  conscious- 
ness by  Christ,  as  the  sole  guide  of  his  life  and  other  men’s 
also. 

The  Christian  may  be  subjected  to  external  violence,  he 
may  be  deprived  of  bodily  freedom,  he  may  be  in  bondage 
to  his  passions  (he  who  commits  sin  is  the  slave  of  sin), 
but  he  cannot  be  in  bondage  in  the  sense  of  being  forced 
by  any  danger  or  by  any  threat  of  external  harm  to  perform 
an  act  which  is  against  his  conscience. 

He  cannot  be  compelled  to  do  this,  because  the  depriva- 
tions  and  sufferings  which  form  such  a powerful  weapon 
against  men  of  the  state  conception  of  life,  have  not  the 
least  power  to  compel  him. 

Deprivations  and  sufferings  take  from  them  the  happi- 
ness for  which  they  live  ; but  far  from  disturbing  the 
happiness  of  the  Christian,  which  consists  in  the  conscious- 
ness of  fulfilling  the  will  of  God,  they  may  even  intensify 
it,  when  they  are  inflicted  on  him  for  fulfilling  his  will.  ~ 

And  therefore  the  Christian,  who  is  subject  only  to  the 
inner  divine  law,  not  only  cannot  carry  out  the  enactments 
of  the  external  law,  v/hen  they  are  not  in  agreement  with 


2 12 


THE  KIHGDOM  OF  GOD 


the  divine  law  of  love  which  he  acknowledges  (as  is  usually 
the  case  with  state  obligations),  he  cannot  even  recognize 
the  duty  of  obedience  to  anyone  or  anything  whatever,  he 
cannot  recognize  the  duty  of  what  is  called  allegiance. 

For  a Christian  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  any  govern- 
ment whatever — the  very  act  which  is  regarded  as  the 
foundation  of  the  e.xistence  of  a state — is  a direct  renuncia- 
tion  of  Christianit3c  For  the  man  who  promises  uncon- 
ditional obedience  in  the  future  to  laws,  made  or  to  be 
made,  by  that  very  promise  is  in  the  most  positive  manner 
renouncing  Christianity,  which  means  obeying  in  every  cir- 
cumstance of  life  only  the  divine  law  of  love  he  recognizes 
within  him. 

Under  the  pagan  conception  of  life  it  was  possible  to 
carry  out  the  will  of  the  temporal  authorities,  without 
infringing  the  law  of  God  expressed  in  circumcisions. 
Sabbaths,  fixed  times  of  prayer,  abstention  from  certain 
kinds  of  food,  and  so  on.  The  one  law  was  not  opposed 
to  the  other.  But  that  is  just  the  distinction  between  the 
Christian  religion  and  heathen  religion.  Christianity  does 
not  require  of  a man  certain  definite  negative  acts,  but  puts 
him  in  a new,  different  relation  to  men,  from  which  may 
result  the  most  diverse  acts,  which  cannot  be  defined 
beforehand.  And  therefore  the  Christian  not  only  cannot 
promise  to  obey  the  will  of  any  other  man,  without  know- 
ing what  will  be  required  by  that  will  ; he  not  only  cannot 
obey  the  changing  laws  of  man,  but  he  cannot  even  promise 
to  do  anything  definite  at  a certain  time,  or  to  abstain 
from  doing  anything  for  a certain  time.  For  he  cannot 
know  what  at  any  time  will  be  required  of  him  by  that 
Christian  law  of  love,  obedience  to  which  constitutes  the 
meaning  of  life  for  him.  ^’The  Christian,  in  promising 
unconditional  fulfillment  of  the  laws  of  men  in  the  future, 
would  show  plainly  by  that  promise  that  the  inner  law  of 
God  does  not  constitute  for  him  the  sole  law  of  his  life. 


IS  WITHIN-  YOU." 


213 


For  a Christian  to  promise  obedience  to  men,  or  the  laws 
of  men,  is  just  as  though  a workman  bound  to  one  em- 
ployer should  also  promise  to  carry  out  every  order  that 
might  be  given  him  by  outsiders.  One  cannot  serve  two 
masters. 

The  Christian  is  independent  of  human  authority,  be- 
can^  he  acknowJprTg^  Qod^  aut^rity  alone.  His  law, 
revealed  by  Christ,  he  recognizes  in  himself,  and  TOluntarily 
obeys  it. 

And  this  independence  is  gained,  not  by  means  of  strife, 
not  by  the  destruction  of  existing  forms  of  life,  but  only  by 
a change  in  the  interpretation  of  life.  , This  independence 
results  first  from  the  Christian  recognizing  the  law  of  love, 
revealed  to  him  by  his  teacher,  as  perfectly  sufficient  for 
all  human  relations,  and  therefore  he  regards  every  use  of 
force  as  unnecessary  and  unlawful  ; and  secondly,  from  the 
fact  that  those  deprivations  and  sufferings,  or  threats  of 
deprivations  and  sufferings  (which  reduce  the  man  of  the 
social  conception  of  life  to  the  necessity  of  obeying)  to  the 
Christian  from  his  different  conception  of  life,  present  them- 
selves merely  as  the  inevitable  conditions  of  existence. 
And  these  conditions,  without  striving  against  them  by  force, 
he  patiently  endures,  like  sickness,  hunger,  and  every  other 
hardship,  but  they  cannot  serve  him  as  a guide  for  his 
actions.  The  only  guide  for  the  Christian’s  actions  is  to  be 
found  in  the  divine  principle  living  within  him,  which  can- 
not be  checked  or  governed  by  anything. 

The  Christian  acts  according  to  the  words  of  the  prophecy 
applied  to  his  teacher:  “ He  shall  not  strive,  nor  cry;  neither 
shall  any  man  hear  his  voice  in  the  streets.  A bruised  reed 
shall  he  not  break,  and  smoking  flax  shall  he  not  quench,  till 
he  send  forth  judgment  unto  victory.”  (Matt.  xii.  19,  20.) 

The  Christian  will  not  dispute  with  anyone,  nor  attack 
anyone,  nor  use  violence  against  anyone.  On  the  con- 
trary, he  will  bear  violence  w.ithput  opposing  it.  But  by 


214 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


this  very  attitude  to  violence,  he  will  not  only  himself  be 
free,  but  will  free  the  whole  world  from  all  external  power. 

“ Ye  shall  know  the  truth,  and  the  truth  shall  make  you 
free.”  If  there  were  any  doubt  of  Christianity  being  the 
truth,  the  perfect  liberty,  that  nothing  can  curtail,  which  a 
man  experiences  directly  he  makes  the  Christian  theory  of 
life  his  own,  would  be  an  unmistakable  proof  of  its  truth. 

Men  in  their  present  condition  are  like  a swarm  of  bees 
hanging  in  a cluster  to  a branch.  The  position  of  the  bees 
on  the  branch  is  temporary,  and  must  inevitably  be  changed. 
They  must  start  off  and  find  themselves  a habitation.  Each 
of  the  bees  knows  this,  and  desires  to  change  her  own  and 
the  others’  position,  but  no  one  of  them  can  do  it  till  the 
rest  of  them  do  it.  They  cannot  all  start  off  at  once,  be- 
cause one  hangs  on  to  another  and  hinders  her  from 
separating  from  the  swarm,  and  therefore  they  all  continue 
to  hang  there.  It  would  seem  that  the  bees  could  never 
escape  from  their  position,  just  as  it  seems  that  worldly 
men,  caught  in  the  toils  of  the  state  conception  of  life,  can 
never  escape.  And  there  would  be  no  escape  for  the  bees, 
if  each  of  them  were  not  a living,  separate  creature,  en- 
dowed with  wings  of  its  own.  Similarly  there  would  be  no 
escape  for  men,  if  each  were  not  a living  being  endowed 
with  the  faculty  of  entering  into  the  Christian  conception 
of  life. 

If  every  bee  who  could  fly,  did  not  try  to  fly,  the  others, 
too,  would  never  be  stirred,  and  the  swarm  would  never 
change  its  position.  And  if  the  man  who  has  mastered 
the  Christian  conception  of  life  would  not,  without  waiting 
for  other  people,  begin  to  live  in  accordance  with  this  con- 
ception, mankind  would  never  change  its  position.  But 
only  let  one  bee  spread  her  wings,  start  off,  and  fly  away, 
and  after  her  another,  and  another,  and  the  clinging,  inert 
cluster  would  become  a freely  flying  swarm  of  bees.  Just 
in  the  same  way,  only  let  one  man  look  at  life  as  Chris- 


IS  WITHIN  YOU: 


215 


tianity  teaches  him  to  look  at  it,  and  after  him  let  another 
and  another  do  the  same,  and  the  enchanted  circle  of  exist- 
ence in  the  state  conception  of  life,  from  which  there 
seemed  no  escape,  will  be  broken  through. 

But  men  think  that  to  set  all  men  free  by  this  means  is 
too  slow  a process,  that  they  must  find  some  other  means 
by  which  they  could  set  all  men  free  at  once.  It  is  just  as 
though  the  bees  who  want  to  start  and  fly  away  should 
consider  it  too  long  a process  to  wait  for  all  the  swarm  to 
start  one  by  one  ; and  should  think  they  ought  to  find 
some  means  by  which  it  would  not  be  necessary  for  every 
separate  bee  to  spread  her  wings  and  fly  off,  but  by  which 
the  whole  swarm  could  fly  at  once  where  it  wanted  to.  But 
that  is  not  possible  ; till  a first,  a second,  a third,  a hun- 
dredth bee  spreads  her  wings  and  flies  off  of  her  own 
accord,  the  swarm  will  not  fly  off  and  will  not  begin  its 
new  life.  Till  every  individual  man  makes  the  Christian 
conception  of  life  his  own,  and  begins  to  live  in  accord  with 
it,  there  can  be  no  solution  of  the  problem  of  human  life, 
and  no  establishment  of  a new  form  of  life. 

One  of  the  most  striking  phenomena  of  our  times  is  pre- 
cisely this  advocacy  of  slavery,  which  is  promulgated  among 
the  masses,  not  by  governments,  in  whom  it  is  inevitable, 
but  by  men  who,  in  advocating  socialistic  theories,  regard 
themselves  as  the  champions  of  freedom. 

These  people  advance  the  opinion  that  the  amelioration 
of  life,  the  bringing  of  the  facts  of  life  into  harmony  with 
the  conscience,  will  come,  not  as  the  result  of  the  personal 
efforts  of  individual  men,  but  of  itself  as  the  result  of  a 
certain  possible  reconstruction  of  society  effected  in  some 
way  or  other.  The  idea  is  promulgated  that  men  ought 
not  to  walk  on  their  own  legs  where  they  want  and  ought  to 
go,  but  that  a kind  of  floor  under  their  feet  will  be  moved 
somehow,  so  that  on  it  they  can  reach  where  they  ought  to 
go  without  moving  their  own  legs.  And,  therefore,  all 


2i6 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


their  efforts  ought  to  be  directed,  not  to  going  so  far  as 
their  strength  allows  in  the  direction  they  ought  to  go,  but 
to  standing  still  and  constructing  such  a floor. 

In  the  sphere  of  political  economy  a theory  is  propounded 
which  amounts  to  saying  that  the  worse  things  are  the 
better  they  are ; that  the  greater  the  accumulation  of 
capital,  and  therefore  the  oppression  of  the  workman,  the 
nearer  the  day  of  emancipation,  and,  therefore,  every  per- 
sonal effort  on  the  part  of  a man  to  free  himself  from  the 
oppression  of  capital  is  useless.  In  the  sphere  of  govern- 
ment it  is  maintained  that  the  greater  the  power  of  the 
government,  which,  according  to  this  theory,  ought  to  inter- 
vene in  every  department  of  private  life  in  which  it  has  not 
yet  intervened,  the  better  it  will  be,  and  that  therefore  we 
ought  to  invoke  the  interference  of  government  in  private 
life.  In  politics  and  internr.tional  questions  it  is  maintained 
that  the  improvement  of  the  means  of  destruction,  the  mul- 
tiplication of  armaments,  will  lead  to  the  necessity  of  making 
war  by  means  of  congresses,  arbitration,  and  so  on.  And, 
marvelous  to  say,  so  great  is  the  dullness  of  men,  that  they 
believe  in  these  theories,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  the  whole 
course  of  life,  every  step  they  take,  shows  how  unworthy 
they  are  of  belief. 

The  people  are  suffering  from  oppression,  and  to  deliver 
them  from  this  oppression  they  are  advised  to  frame  general 
measures  for  the  improvement  of  their  position,  which 
measures  are  to  be  intrusted  to  the  authorities,  and  them- 
selves to  continue  to  yield  obedience  to  the  authorities.  And 
obviously  all  that  results  from  this  is  only  greater  power  in 
the  hands  of  the  authorities,  and  greater  oppression  result- 
ing from  it. 

Not  one  of  the  errors  of  men  carries  them  so  far  away 
from  the  aim  toward  which  they  are  struggling  as  this  very 
one.  They  do  all  kinds  of  different  things  for  the  attain- 
ment of  their  aim,  but  not  the  one  simple  obvious  thing 


IS  WITHIN-  you: 


217 


which  is  within  reach  of  everyone.  They  devise  the  subtlest 
means  for  changing  the  position  which  is  irksome  to  them, 
but  not  that  simplest  means,  that  everyone  should  refrain 
from  doing  what  leads  to  that  position. 

I have  been  told  a story  of  a gallant  police  officer,  who 
came  to  a village  where  the  peasants  were  in  insurrection 
and  the  military  had  been  called  out,  and  he  undertook  to 
pacify  the  insurrection  in  the  spirit  of  Nicholas  I.,  by  his 
personal  influence  alone.  He  ordered  some  loads  of  rods 
to  be  brought,  and  collecting  all  the  peasants  together  into 
a barn,  he  went  in  with  them,  locking  the  door  after  him. 
To  begin  with,  he  so  terrified  the  peasants  by  his  loud 
threats  that,  reduced  to  submission  by  him,  they  set  to  work 
to  flog  one  another  at  his  command.  And  so  they  flogged 
one  another  until  a simpleton  was  found  who  would  not 
allow  himself  to  be  flogged,  and  shouted  to  his  companions 
not  to  flog  one  another.  Only  then  the  flogging  ceased  and 
the  police  officer  made  his  escape.  Well,  this  simpleton’s 
advice  would  never  be  followed  by  men  of  the  state  concep- 
tion of  life,  who  continue  to  flog  one  another,  and  teach 
people  that  this  very  act  of  self-castigation  is  the  last  word 
of  human  wisdom. 

Indeed,  can  one  imagine  a more  striking  instance  of  men 
flogging  themselves  than  the  submissiveness  with  which 
men  of  our  times  will  perform  the  very  duties  required  of 
them  to  keep  them  in  slavery,  especially  the  duty  of  military 
service  ? We  see  people  enslaving  themselves,  suffering 
from  this  slavery,  and  believing  that  it  must  be  so,  that  it 
does  not  matter,  and  will  not  hinder  the  emancipation  of 
men,  which  is  being  prepared  somewhere,  somehow,  in  spite 
of  the  ever-increasing  growth  of  slavery. 

In  fact,  take  any  man  of  the  present  time  whatever  (I 
don’t  mean  a true  Christian,  but  an  average  man  of  the 
present  day),  educated  or  uneducated,  believing  or  unbe- 
lieving, rich  or  poor,  married  or  unmarried.  Such  a man 


2i8 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


lives  working  at  his  work,  or  enjoying  his  amusements, 
spending  the  fruits  of  his  labors  on  himself  or  on  those  near 
to  him,  and,  like  everyone,  hating  every  kind  of  restriction 
and  deprivation,  dissension  and  suffering.  Such  a man  is 
going  his  way  peaceably,  when  suddenly  people  come  and  say 
to  him;  First,  promise  and  swear  to  us  that  you  will  slavishly 
obey  us  in  everything  we  dictate  to  you,  and  will  consider 
absolutely  good  and  authoritative  everything  we  plan, 
decide,  and  call  law.  Secondly,  hand  over  a part  of  the 
fruits  of  your  labors  for  us  to  dispose  of — we  will  use  the 
money  to  keep  you  in  slavery,  and  to  hinder  you  from 
forcibly  opposing  our  orders.  Thirdly,  elect  others,  or  be 
yourself  elected,  to  take  a pretended  share  in  the  govern- 
ment, knowing  all  the  while  that  the  government  will  pro- 
ceed quite  without  regard  to  the  foolish  speeches  you,  and 
those  like  you,  may  utter,  and  knowing  that  its  proceedings 
will  be  according  to  our  will,  the  will  of  those  who  have  the 
army  in  their  hands.  Fourthly,  come  at  a certain  time  to 
the  law  courts  and  take  your  share  in  those  senseless  cruel- 
ties which  we  perpetrate  on  sinners,  and  those  whom  we 
have  corrupted,  in  the  shape  of  penal  servitude,  exile,  soli- 
tary confinement,  and  death.  And  fifthly  and  lastl}^  more 
than  all  this,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  you  may  be  on  the  friend- 
liest terms  with  people  of  other  nations,  be  ready,  directly 
we  order  you  to  do  so,  to  regard  those  whom  we  indicate  to 
you  as  your  enemies  ; and  be  ready  to  assist,  either  in  per- 
son or  by  proxy,  in  devastation,  plunder,  and  murder  of 
their  men,  women,  children,  and  aged  alike — possibly  your 
own  kinsmen  or  relations — if  that  is  necessary  to  us. 

One  would  expect  that  every  man  of  the  present  day 
who  has  a grain  of  sense  left,  might  reply  to  such  require- 
ments, “ But  why  should  I do  all  this?”  One  would  think 
every  right-minded  man  must  say  in  amazement:  “Why 
should  I promise  to  yield  obedience  to  everything  that 
has  been  decreed  first  by  Salisbury,  then  by  Gladstone  ; 


/S  WITHIN  YOU. 


219 


one  day  by  Boulanger,  and  another  by  Parliament  ; one  day 
by  Peter  III.,  the  next  by  Catherine,  and  the  day  after  by 
Pougachef  ; one  day  by  a mad  king  of  Bavaria,  another  by 
William  ? Why  should  I promise  to  obey  them,  knowing 
them  to  be  wicked  or  foolish  people,  or  else  not  knowing 
them  at  all  ? Why  am  I to  hand  over  the  fruits  of  my 
labors  to  them  in  the  shape  of  taxes,  knowing  that  the 
money  will  be  spent  on  the  support  of  officials,  prisons, 
churches,  armies,  on  things  that  are  harmful,  and  on  my 
own  enslavement  ? Why  should  I punish  myself  ? Why 
should  I go  wasting  my  time  and  hoodwinking  myself,  giv- 
ing to  miscreant  evildoers  a semblance  of  legality,  by 
taking  part  in  elections,  and  pretending  that  I am  taking 
part  in  the  government,  when  I know  very  well  that  the 
real  control  of  the  government  is  in  the  hands  of  those 
who  have  got  hold  of  the  army?  Why  should  I go  to  the 
law  courts  to  take  part  in  the  trial  and  punishment  of  men 
because  they  have  sinned,  knowing,  if  I am  a Christian, 
that  the  law  of  vengence  is  replaced  by  the  law  of  love, 
and,  if  I am  an  educated  man,  that  punishments  do  not 
reform,  but  only  deprave  those  on  whom  they  are  inflicted  ? 
And  why,  most  of  all,  am  I to  consider  as  enemies  the 
people  of  a neighboring  nation,  with  whom  I have  hitherto 
lived  and  with  whom  I wish  to  live  in  love  and  harmony, 
and  to  kill  and  rob  them,  or  to  bring  them  to  misery,  simply 
in  order  that  the  keys  of  the  temple  at  Jerusalem  may  be  in 
the  hands  of  one  archbishop  and  not  another,  that  one 
German  and  not  another  may  be  prince  in  Bulgaria,  or  that 
the  English  rather  than  the  American  merchants  may  cap- 
ture seals  ? 

And  why,  most  of  all,  should  I take  part  in  person  or 
hire  others  to  murder  my  own  brothers  and  kinsmen  ? 
Why  should  I flog  myself?  It  is  altogether  unnecessary 
for  me  ; it  is  hurtful  to  me,  and  from  every  point  of  view 
it  is  immoral,  base,  and  vile.  So  why  should  I do  this  ? 


220 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


(I 


If  you  tell  me  that  if  I do  it  not  I shall  receive  some  injury 
from  someone,  then,  in  the  first  place,  I cannot  anticipate 
from  anyone  an  injury  so  great  as  the  injury  you  bring  on 
me  if  I obey  you  ; and  secondly,  it  is  perfectly  clear  to  me 
that  if  we  our  own  selves  do  not  flog  ourselves,  no  one  will 
flog  us. 

As  for  the  government — that  means  the  tzars,  ministers, 
and  officials  with  pens  in  their  hands,  who  cannot  force  us 
into  doing  anything,  as  that  officer  of  police  compelled  the 
peasants  ; the  men  who  will  drag  us  to  the  law  court,  to 
prison,  and  to  execution,  are  not  tzars  or  officials  with 
pens  in  their  hands,  but  the  very  people  who  are  in  the 
same  position  as  we  are.  And  it  is  just  as  unprofitable  and 
harmful  and  unpleasant  to  them  to  be  flogged  as  to  me, 
and  therefore  there  is  every  likelihood  that  if  I open  their 
eyes  they  not  only  would  not  treat  me  with  violence,  but 
would  do  just  as  I am  doing. 

Thirdly,  even  if  it  should  come  to  pass  that  I had  to 
suffer  for  it,  even  then  it  would  be  better  for  me  to  be 
exiled  or  sent  to  prison  for  standing  up  for  common  sense 
and  right — which,  if  not  to-day,  at  least  within  a very  short 
time,  must  be  triumphant — than  to  suffer  for  folly  and 
wrong  which  must  come  to  an  end  directly.  And  there- 
fore, even  in  that  case,  it  is  better  to  run  the  risk  of  their 
banishing  me,  shutting  me  up  in  prison,  or  executing  me, 
than  of  my  living  all  my  life  in  bondage,  through  my  own 
fault,  to  wicked  men.  Better  is  this  than  the  possibility  of 
being  destroyed  by  victorious  enemies,  and  being  stupidly 
tortured  and  killed  by  them,  in  fighting  for  a cannon,  or  a 
piece  of  land  of  no  use  to  anyone,  or  for  a senseless  rag 
called  a banner. 

I don’t  want  to  flog  myself  and  I won’t  do  it.  I have  no 
reason  to  do  it.  Do  it  yourselves,  if  you  want  it  done  ; but 
I won’t  do  it. 

One  would  have  thought  that  not  religious  or  moral  feel- 


75  WITHIN  YOU."  , 221 

ing  alone,  but  the  simplest  common  sense  and  foresight 
should  impel  every  man  of  the  present  day  to  answer  and 
to  act  in  that  way.  But  not  so.  Men  of  the  state  con- 
ception of  life  are  of  the  opinion  that  to  act  in  that  way  is 
not  necessary,  and  is  even  prejudicial  to  the  attainment  of 
their  object,  the  emancipation  of  men  from  slavery.  They 
hold  that  we  must  continue,  like  the  police  officer’s  peas- 
ants, to  flog  one  another,  consoling  ourselves  with  the 
reflection  that  we  are  talking  away  in  the  assemblies  and 
meetings,  founding  trades  unions,  marching  through  the 
streets  on  the  ist  of  May,  getting  up  conspiracies,  and 
stealthily  teasing  the  government  that  is  flogging  us,  and 
that  through  all  this  it  will  be  brought  to  pass  that,  by 
enslaving  ourselves  in  closer  and  closer  bondage,  we  shall 
very  soon  be  free. 

Nothing  hinders  the  emancipation  of  men  from  slavery 
so  much  as  this  amazing  error.  Instead  of  every  man 
directing  his  energies  to  freeing  himself,  to  transforming 
his  conception  of  life,  people  seek  for  an  external  united 
method  of  gaining  freedom,  and  continue  to  rivet  their 
chains  faster  and  faster. 

It  is  much  as  if  men  were  to  maintain  that  to  make  up  a 
fire  there  was  no  need  to  kindle  any  of  the  coals,  but  that 
all  that  was  necessary  was  to  arrange  the  coals  in  a certain 
order.  Yet  the  fact  that  the  freedom  of  all  men  will  be 
brought  about  only  through  the  freedom  of  individual 
persons,  becomes  more  and  more  clear  as  time  goes  on. 
The  freedom  of  individual  men,  in  the  name  of  the  Chris- 
tian conception  of  life,  from  state  domination,  which  was 
formerly  an  exceptional  and  unnoticed  phenomenon,  has  of 
late  acquired  threatening  significance  for  state  authorities. 

If  in  a former  age,  in  the  Roman  times,  it  happened  that 
a Christian  confessed  his  religion  and  refused  to  take  part 
in  sacrifices,  and  to  worship  the  emperors  or  the  gods  ; or 
in  the  Middle  Ages  a Christian  refused  to  worship  images, 


222 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


or  to  acknowledge  the  authority  of  the  Pope — these  cases 
were  in  the  first  place  a matter  of  chance.  A man  might 
be  placed  under  the  necessity  of  confessing  his  faith,  or  he 
might  live  all  his  life  without  being  placed  under  this 
necessity.  But  now  all  men,  without  exception,  are  sub- 
jected to  this  trial  of  their  faith.  Every  man  of  the  present 
day  is  under  the  necessity  of  taking  part  in  the  cruelties  of 
pagan  life,  or  of  refusing  all  participation  in  them.  And 
secondly,  in  those  days  cases  of  refusal  to  worship  the  gods 
or  the  images  or  the  Pope  were  not  incidents  that  had  any 
material  bearing  on  the  state.  Whether  men  worshiped 
or  did  not  worship  the  gods  or  the  images  or  the  Pope, 
the  state  remained  just  as  powerful.  But  now  cases  of 
refusing  to  comply  with  the  unchristian  demands  of  the 
government  are  striking  at  the  very  root  of  state  authority, 
because  the  whole  authority  of  the  state  is  based  on  the 
compliance  with  these  unchristian  demands. 

The  sovereign  powers  of  the  world  have  in  the  course  of 
time  been  brought  into  a position  in  which,  for  their  own 
preservation,  they  must  require  from  all  men  actions  which 
cannot  be  performed  by  men  who  profess  true  Chris- 
tianity. 

And  therefore  in  our  days  every  profession  of  true  Chris- 
tianity, by  any  individual  man,  strikes  at  the  most  essential 
power  of  the  state,  and  inevitably  leads  the  way  for  the 
emancipation  of  all. 

What  importance,  one  might  think,  can  one  attach  to 
such  an  incident  as  some  dozens  of  crazy  fellows,  as  people 
will  call  them,  refusing  to  take  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  the 
government,  refusing  to  pay  taxes,  to  take  part  in  law  pro- 
ceedings or  in  military  service  ? 

These  people  are  punished  and  exiled  to  a distance,  and 
life  goes  on  in  its  old  way.  One  might  think  there  was  no 
importance  in  such  incidents  ; but  yet,  it  is  just  those  inci- 
dents, more  than  anything  else,  that  will  undermine  the 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


223 


power  of  the  state  and  prepare  the  way  for  the  freedom  of 
men.  These  are  the  individual  bees,  who  are  beginning  to 
separate  from  the  swarm,  and  are  flying  near  it,  waiting  till 
the  whole  swarm  can  no  longer  be  prevented  from  starting 
off  after  them.  And  the  governments  know  this,  and  fear 
such  incidents  more  than  all  the  socialists,  communists,  and 
anarchists,  and  their  plots  and  dynamite  bombs. 

A new  reign  is  beginning.  According  to  the  universal 
rule  and  established  order  it  is  required  that  all  the  subjects 
should  take  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  the  new  government. 
There  is  a general  decree  to  that  effect,  and  all  are 
summoned  to  the  council-houses  to  take  the  oath.  All  at 
once  one  man  in  Perm,  another  in  Tula,  a third  in  Moscow, 
and  a fourth  in  Kalouga  declare  that  they  will  not  take  the 
oath,  and  though  there  is  no  communication  between  them, 
they  all  explain  their  refusal  on  the  same  grounds — namely, 
that  swearing  is  forbidden  by  the  law  of  Christ,  and  that 
even  if  swearing  had  not  been  forbidden,  they  could  not, 
in  the  spirit  of  the  law  of  Christ,  promise  to  perform  the 
evil  actions  required  of  them  in  the  oath,  such  as  informing 
against  all  such  as  may  act  against  the  interests  of  the 
government,  or  defending  their  government  with  firearms 
or  attacking  its  enemies.  They  are  brought  before  rural 
police  officers,  district  police  captains,  priests,  and  gov- 
ernors. They  are  admonished,  questioned,  threatened,  and 
punished  ; but  they  adhere  to  their  resolution,  and  do  not 
take  the  oath.  And  among  the  millions  of  those  who  did 
take  the  oath,  those  dozens  go  on  living  who  did  not  take 
the  oath.  And  they  are  questioned  : 

“ What,  didn’t  you  take  the  oath  ? ” 

“ No,  I didn’t  take  the  oath.” 

“ And  what  happened — nothing  ? ” 

“ Nothing.” 

The  subjects  of  a state  are  all  bound  to  pay  taxes.  And 
everyone  pays  taxes,  till  suddenly  one  man  in  Kharkov, 


224 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


another  in  Tver,  and  a third  in  Samara  refuse  to  pay 
taxes — all,  as  though  in  collusion,  saying  the  same  thing. 
One  says  he  will  only  pay  when  they  tell  him  what  object 
the  money  taken  from  him  will  be  spent  on.  “ If  it  is  for 
good  deeds,”  he  says,  “ he  will  give  it  of  his  own  accord, 
and  more  even  than  is  required  of  him.  If  for  evil  deeds, 
then  he  will  give  nothing  voluntarily,  because  by  the  law  of 
Christ,  whose  follower  he  is,  he  cannot  take  part  in  evil 
deeds.”  The  others,  too,  say  the  same  in  other  words,  and 
will  not  voluntarily  pay  the  taxes. 

Those  who  have  anything  to  be  taken  have  their  prop- 
erty taken  from  them  by  force  ; as  for  those  who  have 
nothing,  they  are  left  alone. 

“ What,  didn’t  you  pay  the  tax  ? ” 

“ No,  I didn’t  pay  it.” 

“And  what  happened — nothing?” 

“ Nothing.” 

There  is  the  institution  of  passports.  Everyone  moving 
from  his  place  of  residence  is  bound  to  carry  one,  and  to 
pay  a duty  on  it.  Suddenly  people  are  to  be  found  in 
various  places  declaring  that  to  carry  a passport  is  not 
necessary,  that  one  ought  not  to  recognize  one’s  depend- 
ence on  a state  which  exists  by  means  of  force  ; and  these 
people  do  not  carry  passports,  or  pay  the  duty  on  them. 
And  again,  it’s  impossible  to  force  those  people  by  any 
means  to  do  what  is  required.  They  send  them  to  jail, 
and  let  them  out  again,  and  these  people  live  without  pass- 
ports. 

All  peasants  are  bound  to  fill  certain  police  offices — that 
of  village  constable,  and  of  watchman,  and  so  on.  Sud- 
denly in  Kharkov  a peasant  refuses  to  perform  this  duty, 
justifying  his  refusal  on  the  ground  that  by  the  law  of 
Christ,  of  which  he  is  a follower,  he  cannot  put  any  man  in 
fetters,  lock  him  up,  or  drag  him  from  place  to  place.  The 
same  declaration  is  made  by  a peasant  in  Tver,  another  in 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


225 


Tambov.  These  peasants  are  abused,  beaten,  shut  up  in 
prison,  but  they  stick  to  their  resolution  and  don’t  fill  these 
offices  against  their  convictions.  And  at  last  they  cease  to 
appoint  them  as  constables.  And  again  nothing  happens. 

All  citizens  are  obliged  to  take  a share  in  law  proceedings 
in  the  character  of  jurymen.  Suddenly  the  most  different 
people — mechanics,  professors,  tradesmen,  peasants,  serv- 
ants, as  though  by  agreement  refuse  to  fill  this  office,  and 
not  on  the  grounds  allowed  as  sufficient  by  law,  but  because 
any  process  at  law  is,  according  to  their  views,  unchristian. 
They  fine  these  people,  trying  not  to  let  them  have  an 
opportunity  of  explaining  their  motives  in  public,  and 
replace  them  by  others.  And  again  nothing  can  be  done. 

All  young  men  of  twenty-one  years  of  age  are  obliged  to 
draw  lots  for  service  in  the  army.  All  at  once  one  young 
man  in  Moscow,  another  in  Tver,  a third  in  Kharkov,  and 
a fourth  in  Kiev  present  themselves  before  the  authorities, 
and,  as  though  by  previous  agreement,  declare  that  they 
will  not  take  the  oath,  they  will  not  serve  because  they  are 
Christians.  I will  give  the  details  of  one  of  the  first  cases, 
since  they  have  become  more  frequent,  which  I happen  to 
know  about.*  The  same  treatment  has  been  repeated  in 
every  other  case.  A young  man  of  fair  education  refuses 
in  the  Moscow  Townhall  to  take  the  oath.  No  attention 
is  paid  to  what  he  says,  and  it  is  requested  that  he  should 
pronounce  the  words  of  the  oath  like  the  rest.  He  declines, 
quoting  a particular  passage  of  the  Gospel  in  which  swear- 
ing is  forbidden.  No  attention  is  paid  to  his  arguments, 
and  he  is  again  requested  to  comply  with  the  order,  but  he 
does  not  comply  with  it.  Then  it  is  supposed  that  he  is  a 
sectary  and  therefore  does  not  understand  Christianity  in 
the  right  sense,  that  is  to  say,  not  in  the  sense  in  which  the 
priests  in  the  pay  of  the  government  understand  it.  And 

All  the  details  of  this  case,  as  well  as  those  preceding  it,  are  authentic. 


226 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


the  young  man  is  conducted  under  escort  to  the  priests, 
that  they  may  bring  him  to  reason.  The  priests  begin  to 
reason  with  him,  but  their  efforts  in  Christ’s  name  to  per- 
suade him  to  renounce  Christ  obviously  have  no  influence 
on  him  ; he  is  pronounced  incorrigible  and  sent  back  again 
to  the  army.  He  persists  in  not  taking  the  oath  and  openly 
refuses  to  perform  any  military  duties.  It  is  a case  that 
has  not  been  provided  for  by  the  laws.  To  overlook  such 
a refusal  to  comply  with  the  demands  of  the  authorities  is 
out  of  the  question,  but  to  put  such  a case  on  a par  with 
simple  breach  of  discipline  is  also  out  of  the  question. 

After  deliberation. among  themselves,  the  military  au- 
thorities decide  to  get  rid  of  the  troublesome  young  man, 
to  consider  him  as  a revolutionist,  and  they  dispatch  him 
under  escort  to  the  committee  of  the  secret  police.  The 
police  authorities  and  gendarmes  cross-question  him,  but 
nothing  that  he  says  can  be  brought  under  the  head  of  any 
of  the  misdemeanors  which  come  under  their  jurisdiction. 
And  there  is  no  possibility  of  accusing  him  either  of  revo- 
lutionary acts  or  revolutionary  plotting,  since  he  declares 
that  he  does  not  wish  to  attack  anything,  but,  on  the  con- 
trary, is  opposed  to  any  use  of  force,  and,  far  from  plotting 
in  secret,  he  seeks  every  opportunity  of  saying  and  doing 
all  that  he  says  and  does  in  the  most  open  manner.  And 
the  gendarmes,  though  they  are  bound  by  no  hard-and-fast 
rules,  still  find  noground  fora  criminal  charge  in  the  young 
man,  and,  like  the  clergy,  they  send  him  back  to  the  army. 
Again  the  authorities  deliberate  together,  and  decide  to  ac- 
cept him  though  he  has  not  taken  the  oath,  and  to  enrol 
him  among  the  soldiers.  They  put  him  into  the  uniform, 
enrol  him,  and  send  him  under  guard  to  the  place  where 
the  army  is  quartered.  There  the  chief  officer  of  the 
division  which  he  enters  again  expects  the  young  man  to 
perform  his  military  duties,  and  again  he  refuses  to  obey, 
and  in  the  presence  of  other  soldiers  explains  the  reason  of 


75  WITHIN  you:' 


227 


his  refusal,  saying  that  he  as  a Christian  cannot  voluntarily 
prepare  himself  to  commit  murder,  which  is  forbidden  by 
the  law  of  Moses. 

This  incident  occurs  in  a provincial  town.  The  case 
awakens  the  interest,  and  even  the  sympathy,  not  only  of 
outsiders,  but  even  of  the  officers.  And  the  chief  officers 
consequently  do  not  decide  to  punish  this  refusal  of  obedi- 
ence with  disciplinary  measures.  To  save  appearances, 
though,  they  shut  the  young  man  up  in  prison,  and  write 
to  the  highest  military  authorities  to  inquire  what  they  are 
to  do.  To  refuse  to  serve  in  the  army,  in  which  the  Tzar 
himself  serves,  and  which  enjoys  the  blessing  of  the  Church, 
seems  insanity  from  the  official  point  of  view.  Consequently 
they  write  from  Petersburg  that,  since  the  young  man 
must  be  out  of  his  mind,  they  must  not  use  any  severe 
treatment  with  him,  but  must  send  him  to  a lunatic  asylum, 
that  his  mental  condition  may  be  inquired  into  and  be 
scientifically  treated.  They  send  him  to  the  asylum  in  the 
hope  that  he  will  remain  there,  like  another  young  man, 
who  refused  ten  years  ago  at  Tver  to  serve  in  the  army, 
and  who  was  tortured  in  the  asylum  till  he  submitted.  But 
even  this  step  does  not  rid  the  military  authorities  of  the 
inconvenient  man.  The  doctors  examine  him,  interest 
themselves  warmly  in  his  case,  and  naturally  finding  in  him 
no  symptoms  of  mental  disease,  send  him  back  to  the  army. 
There  they  receive  him,  and  making  believe  to  have  forgot- 
ten his  refusal,  and  his  motives  for  it,  they  again  request 
him  to  go  to  drill,  and  again  in  the  presence  of  the  other 
soldiers  he  refuses  and  explains  the  reason  of  his  refusal. 
The  affair  continues  to  attract  more  and  more  attention, 
both  among  the  soldiers  and  the  inhabitants  of  the  town. 
Again  they  write  to  Petersburg,  and  thence  comes  the 
decree  to  transfer  the  young  man  to  some  division  of  the 
army  stationed  on  the  frontier,  in  some  place  where  the 
army  is  under  martial  law,  where  he  can  be  shot  for  refus- 


228 


“ THE  KHSIGDOM  OF  GOD 


ing  to  obey,  and  where  the  matter  can  proceed  without 
attracting  observation,  seeing  that  there  are  few  Russians 
and  Christians  in  such  a distant  part,  but  the  majority  are 
foreigners  and  Mohammedans.  This  is  accordingly  done. 
They  transfer  him  to  a division  stationed  on  the  Zacaspian 
border,  and  in  company  with  convicts  send  him  to  a chief 
officer  who  is  notorious  for  his  harshness  and  severity. 

All  this  time,  through  all  these  changes  from  place  to 
place,  the  young  man  is  roughly  treated,  kept  in  cold,  hun- 
ger, and  filth,  and  life  is  made  burdensome  to  him  generally. 
But  all  these  sufferings  do  not  compel  him  to  change  his 
resolution.  On  the  Zacaspian  border,  where  he  is  again 
requested  to  go  on  guard  fully  armed,  he  again  declines  to 
obey.  He  does  not  refuse  to  go  and  stand  near  the  hay- 
stacks where  they  place  him,  but  refuses  to  take  his  arms, 
declaring  that  he  will  not  use  violence  in  any  case  against 
anyone.  All  this  takes  place  in  the  presence  of  the  other 
soldiers.  To  let  such  a refusal  pass  unpunished  is  impossi- 
ble, and  the  young  man  is  put  on  his  trial  for  breach  of 
discipline.  The  trial  takes  place,  and  he  is  sentenced  to 
confinement  in  the  military  prison  for  two  years.  He  is 
again  transferred,  in  company  with  convicts,  by  etape,  to 
Caucasus,  and  there  he  is  shut  up  in  prison  and  falls  under  ^ 
the  irresponsible  power  of  the  jailer.  There  he  is  perse- 
cuted for  a year  and  a half,  but  he  does  not  for  all  that 
alter  his  decision  not  to  bear  arms,  and  he  explains  why  he 
will  not  do  this  to  everyone  with  whom  he  is  brought  in 
contact.  At  the  end  of  the  second  year  they  set  him  free, 
before  the  end  of  his  term  of  imprisonment,  reckoning  it 
contrary  to  law  to  keep  him  in  prison  after  his  time  of  mili- 
tary service  was  over,  and  only  too  glad  to  get  rid  of  him 
as  soon  as  possible. 

Other  men  in  various  parts  of  Russia  behave,  as  though 
by  agreement,  precisely  in  the  same  way  as  this  young  man, 
and  in  all  these  cases  the  government  has  adopted  the 


/S  WITHIN  YOU." 


229 


same  timorous,  undecided,  and  secretive  course  of  action. 
Some  of  these  men  are  sent  to  the  lunatic  asylum,  some 
are  enrolled  as  clerks  and  transferred  to  Siberia,  some  are 
sent  to  work  in  the  forests,  some  are  sent  to  prison,  some 
are  fined.  And  at  this  very  time  some  men  of  this  kind 
are  in  prison,  not  charged  with  their  real  offense — that  is, 
denying  the  lawfulness  of  the  action  of  the  government, 
but  for  non-fulfillment  of  special  obligations  imposed  by 
government.  Thus  an  officer  of  reserve,  who  did  not  re- 
port his  change  of  residence,  and  justified  this  on  the 
ground  that  he  would  not  serve  in  the  army  any  longer, 
was  fined  thirty  rubles  for  non-compliance  with  the  orders 
of  the  superior  authority.  This  fine  he  also  declined  volun- 
tarily to  pay.  In  the  same  way  some  peasants  and  soldiers 
who  have  refused  to  be  drilled  and  to  bear  arms  have  been 
placed  under  arrest  on  a charge  of  breach  of  discipline  and 
insolence. 

And  cases  of  refusing  to  comply  with  the  demands  of 
government  when  they  are  opposed  to  Christianity,  and 
especially  cases  of  refusing  to  serve  in  the  army,  are  occur- 
ring of  late  not  in  Russia  only,  but  everywhere.  Thus  I 
happen  to  know  that  in  Servia  men  of  the  so-called  sect  of 
Nazarenes  steadily  refuse  to  serve  in  the  army,  and  the 
Austrian  Government  has  been  carrying  on  a fruitless  con- 
test with  them  for  years,  punishing  them  with  imprison- 
ment. In  the  year  1885  there  were  130  such  cases.  I know 
that  in  Switzerland  in  the  year  1890  there  were  men  in 
prison  in  the  castle  of  Chillon  for  declining  to  serve  in  the 
army,  whose  resolution  was  not  shaken  by  their  punishment. 
There  have  been  such  cases  in  Sweden,  and  the  men  who 
refused  obedience  were  sent  to  prison  in  exactly  the  same 
way,  and  the  government  studiously  concealed  these  cases 
from  the  people.  There  have  been  similar  cases  also  in 
Prussia.  I know  of  the  case  of  a sub-lieutenant  of  the 
Guards,  who  in  1891  declared  to  the  authorities  in  Berlin 


230 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  COD 


that  he  would  not,  as  a Christian,  continue  to  serve,  and  in 
spite  of  all  admonitions,  threats,  and  punishments  he  stuck 
to  his  resolution.  In  the  south  of  France  a society  has 
arisen  of  late  bearing  the  name  of  the  Hinschists  (these 
facts  are  taken  from  the  Peace  Herald,  July,  1891),  the 
members  of  which  refuse  to  enter  military  service  on  the 
grounds  of  their  Christian  principles.  At  first  they  were 
enrolled  in  the  ambulance  corps,  but  now,  as  their  numbers 
increase,  they  are  subjected  to  punishment  for  non-compli- 
ance, but  they  still  refuse  to  bear  arms  just  the  same. 

The  socialists,  the  communists,  the  anarchists,  with 
their  bombs  and  riots  and  revolutions,  are  not  nearly  so 
much  dreaded  by  governments  as  these  disconnected  indi- 
viduals coming  from  different  parts,  and  all  justifying  their 
non-compliance  on  the  grounds  of  the  same  religion,  which 
is  known  to  all  the  world. 

Every  government  knows  by  what  means  and  in  what 
manner  to  defend  itself  from  revolutionists,  and  has  re- 
sources for  doing  so,  and  therefore  does  not  dread  these 
external  foes.  But  what  are  governments  to  do  against 
men  who  show  the  uselessness,  superfluousness,  and  perni- 
ciousness of  all  governments,  and  who  do  not  contend 
against  them,  but  simply  do  not  need  them  and  do  without 
them,  and  therefore  are  unwilling  to  take  any  part  in  them  ? 

The  revolutionists  say  ; The  form  of  government  is  bad 
in  this  respect  and  that  respect  ; we  must  overturn  it  and 
substitute  this  or  that  form  of  government.  The  Christian 
says  : I know  nothing  about  the  form  of  government,  I 
don’t  know  whether  it  is  good  or  bad,  and  I don’t  want  to 
overturn  it  precisely  because  I don’t  know  whether  it’s 
good  or  bad,  but  for  the  very  same  reason  I don’t  want  to 
support  it  either.  And  I not  only  don’t  want  to,  but  I 
can’t,  because  what  it  demands  of  me  is  against  my  con- 
science. 

All  state  obligations  are  against  the  conscience  of  a 


IS  WinilN'  YOU." 


231 


Christian — the  oath  of  allegiance,  taxes,  law  proceedings, 
and  military  service.  And  the  whole  power  of  the  govern- 
ment rests  on  these  very  obligations. 

Revolutionary  enemies  attack  the  government  from 
without.  Christianity  does  not  attack  it  at  all,  but,  from 
within,  it  destroys  all  the  foundations  on  which  govern- 
ment rests. 

Among  the  Russian  people,  especially  since  the  age  of 
Peter  I.,  the  protest  of  Christianity  against  the  govern- 
ment has  never  ceased,  and  the  social  organization  has 
been  such  that  men  emigrate  in  communes  to  Turkey,  to 
China,  and  to  uninhabited  lands,  and  not  only  feel  no  need 
of  state  aid,  but  always  regard  the  state  as  a useless 
burden,  only  to  be  endured  as  a misfortune,  whether  it 
happens  to  be  Turkish,  Russian,  or  Chinese.  And  so,  too, 
among  the  Russian  people  more  and  more  frequent 
examples  have  of  late  appeared  of  conscious  Christian 
freedom  from  subjection  to  the  state.  And  these  examples 
are  the  more  alarming  for  the  government  from  the  fact 
that  these  non-compliant  persons  often  belong  not  to  the 
so-called  lower  uneducated  classes,  but  are  men  of  fair  or 
good  education  ; and  also  from  the  fact  that  they  do  not  in 
these  days  justify  their  position  by  any  mystic  and  excep- 
tional views,  as  in  former  times,  do  not  associate  them- 
selves with  any  superstitious  or  fanatic  rites,  like  the  sects 
who  practice  self-immolation  by  fire,  or  the  wandering 
pilgrims,  but  put  their  refusal  on  the  very  simplest  and 
clearest  grounds,  comprehensible  to  all,  and  recognized  as 
true  by  all. 

Thus  they  refuse  the  voluntary  payment  of  taxes, 
because  taxes  are  spent  on  deeds  of  violence — on  the  pay 
of  men  of  violence — soldiers,  on  the  construction  of 
prisons,  fortresses,  and  cannons.  They  as  Christians 
regard  it  as  sinful  and  immoral  to  have  any  hand  in  such 
deeds. 


232 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


Those  who  refuse  to  take  the  oath  of  allegiance  refuse 
because  to  promise  obedience  to  authorities,  that  is,  to  men 
who  are  given  to  deeds  of  violence,  is  contrary  to  the 
sense  of  Christ’s  teaching.  They  refuse  to  take  the  oath 
in  the  law  courts,  because  oaths  are  directly  forbidden  by 
the  Gospel.  They  refuse  to  perform  police  duties,  because 
in  the  performance  of  these  duties  they  must  use  force 
against  their  brothers  and  ill  treat  them,  and  a Christian 
cannot  do  that.  They  refuse  to  take  part  in  trials  at  law, 
because  they  consider  every  appeal  to  law  is  fulfilling  the 
law  of  vengeance,  which  is  inconsistent  with  the  Christian 
law  of  forgiveness  and  love.  They  refuse  to  take  any  part 
in  military  preparations  and  in  the  army,  because  they  can- 
not be  executioners,  and  they  are  unwilling  to  prepare 
themselves  to  be  so. 

The  motives  in  all  these  cases  are  so  excellent  that,  how- 
ever despotic  governments  may  be,  they  could  hardly 
punish  them  openly.  To  punish  men  for  refusing  to  act 
against  their  conscience  the  government  must  renounce  all 
claim  to  good  sense  and  benevolence.  And  they  assure 
people  that  they  only  rule  in  the  name  of  good  sense  and 
benevolence. 


What  are  governments  to  do  against  such  people  ? 


Governments  can  of  course  flog  to  death  or  execute  or 
keep  in  perpetual  imprisonment  all  enemies  who  want  to 
overturn  them  by  violence,  they  can  lavish  gold  on  that 
section  of  the  people  who  are  ready  to  destroy  their  enemies. 
But  what  can  they  do  against  men  who,  without  wishing  to 
overturn  or  destroy  anything,  desire  simply  for  their  part 
to  do  nothing  against  the  law  of  Christ,  and  who,  therefore, 
refuse  to  perform  the  commonest  state  requirements,  which 
are,  therefore,  the  most  indispensable  to  the  maintenance 
of  the  state  ? 

If  they  had  been  revolutionists,  advocating  and  practic- 
ing violence  and  murder,  their  suppression  would  have  been 


IS  WITHIN  YOU.” 


233 


an  easy  matter  ; some  of  them  could  have  been  bought 
over,  some  could  have  been  duped,  some  could  have  been 
overawed,  and  these  who  could  not  be  bought  over,  duped, 
or  overawed  would  have  been  treated  as  criminals,  enemies 
of  society,  would  have  been  executed  or  imprisoned,  and 
the  crowd  would  have  approved  of  the  action  of  the  govern- 
ment. If  they  had  been  fanatics,  professing  some  peculiar 
belief,  it  might  have  been  possible,  in  disproving  the  super- 
stitious errors  mixed  in  with  their  religion,  to  attack  also 
the  truth  they  advocate.  But  what  is  to  be  done  with  men 
who  profess  no  revolutionary  ideas  nor  any  peculiar 
1‘eligious  dogmas,  but  merely  because  they  are  unwilling  to 
do  evil  to  any  man,  refuse  to  take  the  oath,  to  pay  taxes,  to 
take  part  in  law  proceedings,  to  serve  in  the  army,  to  fulfill, 
in  fact,  any  of  the  obligations  upon  which  the  whole  fabric 
of  a state  rests  ? What  is  to  done  with  such  people?  To 
buy  them  over  with  bribes  is  impossible  ; the  very  risks  to 
which  they  voluntarily  expose  themselves  show  that  they 
are  incorruptible.  To  dupe  them  into  believing  that  this  is 
their  duty  to  God  is  also  impossible,  since  their  refusal  is 
based  on  the  clear,  unmistakable  law  of  God,  recognized 
even  by  those  who  are  trying  to  compel  men  to  act  against 
it.  To  terrify  them  by  threats  is  still  less  possible,  because 
the  deprivations  and  sufferings  to  which  they  are  subjected 
only  strengthen  their  desire  to  follow  the  faith  by  which 
they  are  commanded  : to  obey  God  rather  than  men,  and 
not  to  fear  those  who  can  destroy  the  body,  but  to  fear 
him  who  can  destroy  body  and  soul.  To  kill  them  or  keep 
them  in  perpetual  imprisonment  is  also  impossible.  These 
men  have  friends,  and  a past ; their  way  of  thinking  and 
acting  is  well  known  ; they  are  known  by  everyone  for 
good,  gentle,  peaceable  people,  and  they  cannot  be  regarded 
as  criminals  who  must  be  removed  for  the  safety  of  society. 
And  to  put  men  to  death  who  are  regarded  as  good  men  is 
to  provoke  others  to  champion  them  and  justify  their 


234 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


refusal.  And  it  is  only  necessary  to  explain  the  reasons  of 
their  refusal  to  make  clear  to  everyone  that  these  reasons 
have  the  same  force  for  all  other  men,  and  that  they  all 
ought  to  have  done  the  same  long  ago.  These  cases  put 
the  ruling  powers  into  a desperate  position.  They  see  that 
the  prophecy  of  Christianity  is  coming  to  pass,  that  it  is 
loosening  the  fetters  of  those  in  chains,  and  setting  free 
them  that  are  in  bondage,  and  that  this  must  inevitably  be 
the  end  of  all  oppressors.  The  ruling  authorities  see  this, 
they  know  that  their  hours  are  numbered,  and  they  can  do 
nothing.  All  that  they  can  do  to  save  themselves  is  only 
deferring  the  hour  of  their  downfall.  And  this  they  do, 
but  their  position  is  none  the  less  desperate. 

It  is  like  the  position  of  a conqueror  who  is  trying  to  save 
a town  which  has  been  been  set  on  fire  by  its  own  inhabit- 
ants. Directly  he  puts  out  the  conflagration  in  one  place, 
it  is  alight  in  two  other  places  ; directly  he  gives  in  to  the 
fire  and  cuts  off  what  is  on  fire  from  a large  building,  the 
building  itself  is  alight  at  both  ends.  These  separate 
fires  may  be  few,  but  they  are  burning  with  a flame  which, 
however  small  a spark  it  starts  from,  never  ceases  till  it  has 
set  the  whole  ablaze. 

Thus  it  is  that  the  ruling  authorities  are  in  such  a defense- 
less position  before  men  who  advocate  Christianity,  that  but 
little  is  necessary  to  overthrow  this  sovereign  power  which 
seems  so  powerful,  and  has  held  such  an  exalted  position 
for  so  many  centuries.  And  yet  social  reformers  are  busy 
promulgating  the  idea  that  it  is  not  necessary  and  is  even 
pernicious  and  immoral  for  every  man  separately  to  work 
out  his  own  freedom.  As  though,  while  one  set  of  men 
have  been  at  work  a long  while  turning  a river  into  a new 
channel,  and  had  dug  out  a complete  water-course  and  had 
only  to  open  the  floodgates  for  the  water  to  rush  in  and  do 
the  rest,  another  set  of  men  should  come  along  and  begin  to 
advise  them  that  it  would  be  much  better,  instead  of  letting 


75  WITHIN  YOU." 


235 


the  water  out,  to  construct  a machine  which  would  ladlethe 
water  up  from  one  side  and  pour  it  over  the  other  side. 

But  the  thing  has  gone  too  far.  Already  ruling  govern- 
ments feel  their  weak  and  defenseless  position,  and  men  of 
Christian  principles  are  awakening  from  their  apathy,  and 
already  begin  to  feel  their  power. 

“ I am  come  to  send  a fire  on  the  earth,”  said  Christ, 
“ and  what  will  I,  if  it  be  already  kindled  ? ” 

And  this  fire  is  beginning  to  burn. 


CHAPTER  X. 

EVIL  CANNOT  BE  SUPPRESSED  BY  THE  PHYSICAL  FORCE  OF 
THE  GOVERNMENT — THE  MORAL  PROGRESS  OF  HUMANITY 
IS  BROUGHT  ABOUT  NOT  ONLY  BY  INDIVIDUAL  RECOGNI- 
TION OF  TRUTH,  BUT  ALSO  THROUGH  THE  ESTABLISH- 
MENT OF  A PUBLIC  OPINION. 

Christianity  Destroys  the  State — But  Which  is  Most  Necessary  : Chris- 
tianity or  the  State  ? — There  are  Some  who  Assert  the  Necessity  of  a 
State  Organization,  and  Others  who  Deny  it,  both  Arguing  from  same 
First  Principles — Neither  Contention  can  be  Proved  by  Abstract  Argu- 
ment— The  Question  must  be  Decided  by  the  Stage  in  the  Develop- 
ment of  Conscience  of  Each  Man,  which  will  either  Prevent  or  Allow 
him  to  Support  a Government  Organization — Recognition  of  the 
Futility  and  Immorality  of  Supporting  a State  Organization  Contrary 
to  Christian  Principles  will  Decide  the  Question  for  Every  Man,  in 
Spite  of  any  Action  on  Part  of  the  State — Argument  of  those  who 
Defend  the  Government,  that  it  is  a Form  of  Social  Life,  Needed  to 
Protect  the  Good  from  the  Wicked,  till  all  Nations  and  all  Members 
of  each  Nation  have  Become  Christians — The  Most  Wicked  are  Always 
those  in  Power — The  whole  History  of  Humanity  is  the  History  of  the 
Forcible  Appropriation  of  Power  by  the  Wicked  and  their  Oppression 
of  the  Good — The  Recognition  by  Governments  of  the  Necessity  of 
Opposing  Evil  by  Force  is  Equivalent  to  Suicide  on  their  Part — The 
Abolition  of  State-violence  cannot  Increase  the  Sum  Total  of  Acts  of 
Violence — The  Suppression  of  the  Use  of  Force  is  not  only  Possible, 
but  is  even  Taking  Place  before  Our  Eyes— But  it  will  Never  be  Sup- 


236 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


pressed  by  the  Violence  of  Government,  but  through  Men  who  have 
Attained  Power  by  Evidence  Recognizing  its  Emptiness  and  Becoming 
Better  and  I^ess  Capable  of  Using  Force — Individual  Men  and  also 
Wliole  Nations  Pass  Through  this  Process — By  this  Means  Christianity 
is  Diffused  Through  Consciousness  of  Men,  not  only  in  Spite  of  Use  of 
Violence  by  Government,  but  even  Through  its  Action, and  therefore  the 
Suppression  is  not  to  be  Dreaded,  but  is  Brought  About  by  the  National 
Progress  of  Life — Objection  of  those  who  Defend  State  Organization 
that  Universal  Adoption  of  Christianity  is  hardly  Likely  to  be  Realized 
at  any  Time — The  General  Adoption  of  the  Truths  of  Christianity  is 
being  Brought  About  not  only  by  the  Gradual  and  Inward  Means, that  is, 
by  Knowledge  of  the  Truth,  Prophetic  Insight,  and  Recognition  of  the 
Emptiness  of  Power,  and  Renunciation  of  it  by  Individuals,  but  also  by 
Another  External  Means,  the  Acceptance  of  a New  Truth  by  Whole 
Masses  of  Men  on  a Lower  Level  of  Development  Through  Simple 
Confidence  in  their  Leaders — When  a Certain  Stage  in  the  Diffusion 
of  a Truth  has  been  Reached,  a Public  Opinion  is  Created  which  Im- 
pels a Whole  Mass  of  Men,  formerly  Antagonistic  to  the  New  Truth, 
to  Accept  it — And  therefore  all  Men  may  Quickly  be  Brought  to 
Renounce  the  use  of  Violence  when  once  a Christian  Public  Opinion 
is  Established — The  Conviction  of  Force  being  Necessary  Hinders  the 
Establishment  of  a Christian  Public  Opinion — The  Use  of  Violence 
Leads  Men  to  Distrust  the  Spiritual  Force  which  is  the  Only  Force  by 
which  they  Advance — Neither  Nations  nor  Individuals  have  been 
really  Subjugated  by  Force,  but  only  by  Public  Opinion,  which  no  Force 
can  Resist — Savage  Nations  and  Savage  Men  can  only  be  Subdued  by 
the  Diffusion  of  a Christian  Standard  among  them,  while  actually 
Christian  Nations  in  order  to  Subdue  them  do  all  they  can  to  Destroy 
a Christian  Standard — These  Fruitless  Attempts  to  Civilize  Savages 
Cannot  be  Adduced  as  Proofs  that  Men  Cannot  be  Subdued  by  Chris- 
tianity— Violence  by  Corrupting  Public  Opinion,  only  Hinders  the 
Social  Organization  from  being  What  it  Ought  to  Be — And  by  the  Use 
of  Violence  being  Suppressed,  a Christian  Public  Opinion  would  be 
Established — Whatever  might  be  the  Result  of  the  Suppression  of  Use 
of  Force,  this  Unknown  Future  could  not  be  Worse  than  the  Present 
Condition,  and  so  there  is  no  Need  to  Dread  it — To  Attain  Knowledge  of 
the  Unknown,  and  to  Move  Toward  it,  is  the  Essence  of  Life. 

Christianity  in  its  true  sense  puts  an  end  to  govern- 
ment. So  it  was  understood  at  its  very  commencement ; it 
was  for  that  cause  that  Christ  was  crucified.  So  it  has 


IS  WITIinV  YOU. 


237 


alvva3?s  been  understood  by  people  who  were  not  under  the 
necessity  of  justifying  a Christian  government.  Only  from 
the  time  that  the  heads  of  government  assumed  an  external 
and  nominal  Christianity,  men  began  to  invent  all  the 
impossible,  cunningly  devised  theories  by  means  of  which 
Christianity  can  be  reconciled  with  government.  But  no 
honest  and  serious-minded  man  of  our  day  can  help  seeing 
the  incompatibility  of  true  Christianity — the  doctrine  of 
meekness,  forgiveness  of  injuries,  and  love — with  govern- 
ment, with  its  pomp,  acts  of  violence,  executions,  and  wars. 
The  profession  of  true  Christianity  not  only  excludes  the 
possibility  of  recognizing  government,  but  even  destroys 
its  very  foundations. 

But  if  it  is  so,  and  we  are  right  in  saying  that  Christianity 
is  incompatible  with  government,  then  the  question  naturally 
presents  itself : which  is  more  necessary  to  the  good  of 
humanity,  in  which  way  is  men’s  happiness  best  to  be 
secured,  by  maintaining  the  organization  of  government  or 
by  destroying  it  and  replacing  it  by  Christianity  ? 

Some  people  maintain  that  government  is  more  necessary 
for  humanity,  that  the  destruction  of  the  state  organization 
would  involve  the  destruction  of  all  that  humanity  has 
gained,  that  the  state  has  been  and  still  is  the  only  form  in 
which  humanity  can  develop.  The  evil  which  we  see 
among  peoples  living  under  a government  organization  they 
attribute  not  to  that  type  of  society,  but  to  its  abuses,  which, 
they  say,  can  be  corrected  without  destroying  it,  and  thus 
humanity,  without  discarding  the  state  organization,  can 
develop  and  attain  a high  degree  of  happiness.  And  men 
of  this  way  of  thinking  bring  forward  in  support  of  their 
views  arguments  which  they  think  irrefutable  drawn  from 
history,  philosophy,  and  even  religion.  But  there  are  men 
who  hold  on  the  contrary  that,  as  there  was  a time  when 
humanity  lived  without  government,  such  an  organization 
is  temporary,  and  that  a time  must  come  when  men  need  a 


238 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


new  organization,  and  that  that  time  has  come  now.  And 
men  of  this  way  of  thinking  also  bring  forward  in  support 
of  their  views  arguments  which  they  think  irrefutable  from 
philosophy,  history,  and  religion. 

Volumes  may  be  written  in  defense  of  the  former  view 
(and  volumes  indeed  have  long  ago  been  written  and 
more  will  still  be  written  on  that  side),  but  much  also 
can  be  written  against  it  (and  much  also,  and  most  briU 
iantly,  has  been  written — though  more  recently — on  this 
side). 

And  it  cannot  be  proved,  as  the  champions  of  the  state 
maintain,  that  the  destruction  of  government  involves  a 
social  chaos,  mutual  spoliation  and  murder,  the  destruction 
of  all  social  institutions,  and  the  return  of  mankind  to  bar- 
barism. Nor  can  it  be  proved  as  the  opponents  of  govern- 
ment maintain  that  men  have  already  become  so  wise  and 
good  that  they  will  not  spoil  or  murder  one  another,  but 
will  prefer  peaceful  associations  to  hostilities  ; that  of  their 
own  accord,  unaided  by  the  state,  they  will  make  all  the 
arrangements  that  they  need,  and  that  therefore  govern- 
ment, far  from  being  any  aid,  under  show  of  guarding  men 
exerts  a pernicious  and  brutalizing  influence  over  them.  It 
is  impossible  to  prove  either  of  these  contentions  by 
abstract  reasoning.  Still  less  possible  is  it  to  prove  them 
by  experiment,  since  the  whole  matter  turns  on  the  ques- 
tion, ought  we  to  try  the  experiment  ? The  question 
whether  or  not  the  time  has  come  to  make  an  end  of  gov- 
ernment would  be  unanswerable,  except  that  there  exists 
another  living  means  of  settling  it  beyond  dispute. 

We  may  dispute  upon  the  question  whether  the  nestlings 
are  ready  to  do  without  the  mother-hen  and  to  come  out  of 
the  eggs,  or  whether  they  are  not  yet  advanced  enough. 
But  the  young  birds  will  decide  the  question  without  any 
regard  for  our  arguments  when  they  find  themselves 
cramped  for  space  in  the  eggs.  Then  they  will  begin  to 


IS  WITHImV  you."  239 

try  them  with  their  beaks  and  come  out  of  them  of  their 
own  accord. 

It  is  the  same  with  the  question  whether  the  time  has 
come  to  do  away  with  the  governmental  type  of  society 
and  to  replace  it  by  a new  type.  If  a man,  through  the 
growth  of  a higher  conscience,  can  no  longer  comply  with 
the  demands  of  government,  he  finds  himself  cramped  by 
it  and  at  the  same  time  no  longer  needs  its  protection. 
When  this  comes  to  pass,  the  question  whether  men  are 
ready  to  discard  the  governmental  type  is  solved.  And 
the  conclusion  will  be  as  final  for  them  as  for  the  young 
birds  hatched  out  of  the  eggs.  Just  as  no  power  in  the 
world  can  put  them  back  into  the  shells,  so  can  no  power 
in  the  world  bring  men  again  under  the  governmental  type 
of  society  when  once  they  have  outgrown  it. 

“ It  may  well  be  that  government  was  necessary  and  is 
still  necessary  for  all  the  advantages  which  you  attribute 
to  it,”  says  the  man  who  has  mastered  the  Christian  theory 
of  life.  “ I only  know  that  on  the  one  hand,  government  is 
no  longer  necessary  for  7ne,  and  on  the  other  hand,  / can 
no  longer  carry  out  the  measures  that  are  necessary  to  the 
existence  of  a government.  Settle  for  yourselves  what  you 
need  for  your  life.  I cannot  prove  the  need  or  the  harm 
of  governments  in  general.  I know  only  what  I need  and 
do  not  need,  what  I can  do  and  what  I cannot.  I know 
that  I do  not  need  to  divide  myself  off  from  other  nations, 
and  therefore  I cannot  admit  that  I belong  exclusively  to 
any  state  or  nation,  or  that  I owe  allegiance  to  any  govern- 
ment. I know  that  I do  not  need  all  the  government 
institutions  organized  within  the  state,  and  therefore 
I cannot  deprive  people  who  need  my  labor  to  give  it  in 
the  form  of  taxes  to  institutions  which  I do  not  need, 
which  for  all  I know  may  be  pernicious.  I know  that 
I have  no  need  of  the  administration  or  of  courts  of 
justice  founded  upon  force,  and  therefore  I can  take  no 


240 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


part  in  either.  I know  that  I do  not  need  to  attack  and 
slaughter  other  nations  or  to  defend  myself  from  them  with 
arms,  and  therefore  I can  take  no  part  in  wars  or  prepara- 
tions for  wars.  It  may  well  be  that  there  are  people  who 
cannot  help  regarding  all  this  as  necessary  and  indispens- 
able. I cannot  dispute  the  question  with  them,  I can  only 
speak  for  myself  ; but  I can  say  with  absolute  certainty 
that  I do  not  need  it,  and  that  I cannot  do  it.  And  I do 
not  need  this  and  I cannot  do  it,  not  because  such  is  my 
own,  my  personal  will,  but  because  such  is  the  will  of  him 
who  sent  me  into  life,  and  gave  me  an  indubitable  law  for 
my  conduct  through  life.” 

Whatever  arguments  may  be  advanced  in  support  of  the 
contention  that  the  suppression  of  government  authority 
would  be  injurious  and  would  lead  to  great  calamities, 
men  who  have  once  outgrown  the  governmental  form  of 
society  cannot  go  back  to  it  again.  And  all  the  reasoning 
in  the  world  cannot  make  the  man  who  has  outgrown  the 
governmental  form  of  society  take  part  in  actions  dis- 
allowed by  his  conscience,  any  more  than  the  full-grown 
bird  can  be  made  to  return  into  the  egg-shell. 

“ But  even  it  be  so,”  say  the  champions  of  the  existing 
order  of  things,  “ still  the  suppression  of  government 
violence  can  only  be  possible  and  desirable  when  all  men 
have  become  Christians.  So  long  as  among  people  nomi- 
nally Christians  there  are  unchristian  wicked  men,  who  for 
the  gratification  of  their  own  lusts  are  ready  to  do  harm  to 
others,  the  suppression  of  government  authority,  far  from 
being  a blessing  to  others,  would  only  increase  their  mis- 
eries. The  suppression  of  the  governmental  type  of  society 
is  not  only  undesirable  so  long  as  there  is  only  a minority 
of  true  Christians  ; it  would  not  even  be  desirable  if  the 
whole  of  a nation  were  Christians,  but  among  and  around 
them  were  still  unchristian  men  of  other  nations.  For 
these  unchristian  men  would  rob,  outrage,  and  kill  the 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


241 


Christians  with  impunity  and  would  make  their  lives  miser- 
able. All  that  would  result,  would  be  that  the  bad  would 
oppress  and  outrage  the  good  with  impunity.  And  there- 
fore the  authority  of  government  must  not  be  suppressed 
till  all  the  wicked  and  rapacious  people  in  the  world  are 
extinct.  And  since  this  will  either  never  be,  or  at  least 
cannot  be  for  a long  time  to  come,  in  spite  of  the  efforts  of 
individual  Christians  to  be  independent  of  government 
authority,  it  ought  to  be  maintained  in  the  interests  of  the 
majority.  The  champions  of  government  assert  that  with- 
out it  the  wicked  will  oppress  and  outrage  the  good,  and 
that  the  power  of  the  government  enables  the  good  to 
resist  the  wicked.” 

But  in  this  assertion  the  champions  of  the  existing  order 
of  things  take  for  granted  the  proposition  they  want  to 
prove.  When  they  say  that  except  for  the  government  the 
bad  would  oppress  the  good,  they  take  it  for  granted  that 
the  good  are  those  who  at  the  present  time  are  in  posses- 
sion of  power,  and  the  bad  are  those  who  are  in  subjection 
to  it.  But  this  is  just  what  wants  proving.  It  would  only 
be  true  if  the  custom  of  our  society  were  what  is,  or  rather 
is  supposed  to  be,  the  custom  in  China ; that  is,  that  the 
good  always  rule,  and  that  directly  those  at  the  head  of 
government  cease  to  be  better  than  those  they  rule  over, 
the  citizens  are  bound  to  remove  them.  This  is  supposed 
to  be  the  custom  in  China.  In  reality  it  is  not  so  and  can 
never  be  so.  For  to  remove  the  heads  of  a government 
ruling  by  force,  it  is  not  the  right  alone,  but  the  power  to 
do  so  that  is  needed.  So  that  even  in  China  this  is  only 
an  imaginary  custom.  And  in  our  Christian  world  we  do 
not  even  suppose  such  a custom,  and  we  have  nothing  on 
which  to  build  up  the  supposition  that  it  is  the  good  or  the 
superior  who  are  in  power  ; in  reality  it  is  those  who  have 
seized  power  aud  who  keep  it  for  their  own  and  their 
retainers’  benefit. 


242 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


The  good  cannot  seize  power,  nor  retain  it  ; to  do  this 
men  must  love  power.  And  love  of  power  is  inconsistent 
with  goodness  ; but  quite  consistent  with  the  very  opposite 
qualities — pride,  cunning,  cruelty. 

Without  the  aggrandizement  of  self  and  the  abasement 
of  others,  without  hypocrisies  and  deceptions,  without 
prisons,  fortresses,  executions,  and  murders,  no  power  can 
come  into  existence  or  be  maintained. 

“ If  the  power  of  government  is  suppressed  the  more 
wicked  will  oppress  the  less  wicked,”  say  the  champions 
of  state  authority.  But  when  the  Egyptians  conquered 
the  Jews,  the  Romans  conquered  the  Greeks,  and  the 
Barbarians  conquered  the  Romans,  is  it  possible  that  all 
the  conquerors  were  always  better  than  those  they  con- 
quered ? And  the  same  with  the  transitions  of  power  wuth- 
in  a state  from  one  personage  to  another  : has  the  power 
always  passed  from  a worse  person  to  a better  one  ? When 
Louis  XVI.  was  removed  and  Robespierre  came  to  power, 
and  afterward  Napoleon — who  ruled  then,  a better  man  or 
a worse  ? And  when  were  better  men  in  power,  when  the 
Versaillist  party  or  when  the  Commune  was  in  power  ? 
When  Charles  I.  was  ruler,  or  when  Cromwell  ? And  when 
Peter  III.  was  Tzar,  or  when  he  was  killed  and  Catherine 
was  Tzaritsa  in  one-half  of  Russia  and  Pougachef  ruled 
the  other  ? Which  was  bad  then,  and  which  was  good  ? 
All  men  who  happen  to  be  in  authority  assert  that  their 
authority  is  necessary  to  keep  the  bad  from  oppressing  the 
good,  assuming  that  they  themselves  are  the  good  par  ex- 
cellence, who  protect  other  good  people  from  the  bad. 

But  ruling  means  using  force,  and  using  force  means 
doing  to  him  to  whom  force  is  used,  what  he  does  not  like 
and  what  he  who  uses  the  force  would  certainly  not  like 
done  to  himself.  Consequently  ruling  means  doing  to 
others  what  we  would  not  they  should  do  unto  us,  that  is, 
doing  wrong. 


75  WITHIN  YOU. 


243 


To  submit  means  to  prefer  suffering  to  using  force. 
And  to  prefer  suffering  to  using  force  means  to  be  good, 
or  at  least  less  wicked  than  those  who  do  unto  others  what 
they  would  not  like  themselves. 

And  therefore,  in  all  probability,  not  the  better  but  the 
worse  have  always  ruled  and  are  ruling  now.  There  may 
be  bad  men  among  those  who  are  ruled,  but  it  cannot  be 
that  those  who  are  better  have  generally  ruled  those  who 
are  worse. 

It  might  be  possible  to  suppose  this  with  the  inexact 
heathen  definition  of  good  ; but  with  the  clear  Christian 
definition  of  good  and  evil,  it  is  impossible  to  imagine 
it. 

If  the  more  or  less  good,  and  the  more  or  less  bad  can- 
not be  distinguished  in  the  heathen  world,  the  Christian 
conception  of  good  and  evil  has  so  clearly  defined  the 
characteristics  of  the  good  and  the  wicked,  that  it  is  impos- 
sible to  confound  them.  According  to  Christ’s  teaching 
the  good  are  those  who  are  meek  and  long-suffering,  do 
not  resist  evil  by  force,  forgive  injuries,  and  love  their 
enemies ; those  are  wicked  who  exalt  themselves,  oppress, 
strive,  and  use  force.  Therefore  by  Christ’s  teaching  there 
can  be  no  doubt  whether  the  good  are  to  be  found  among 
rulers  or  ruled,  and  whether  the  wicked  are  among  the 
ruled  or  the  rulers.  Indeed  it  is  absurd  even  to  speak  of 
Christians  ruling. 

Non-Christians,  that  is  those  who  find  the  aim  of  their 
lives  in  earthly  happiness,  must  always  rule  Christians,  the 
aim  of  whose  lives  is  the  renunciation  of  such  earthly 
happiness. 

This  difference  has  always  existed  and  has  become  more 
and  more  defined  as  the  Christian  religion  has  been  more 
widely  diffused  and  more  correctly  understood. 

The  more  widely  true  Christianity  was  diffused  and  the 
more  it  penetrated  men’s  conscience,  the  more  impossible 


244 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


it  was  for  Christians  to  be  rulers,  and  the  easier  it  became 
for  non-Christians  to  rule  them. 

“To  get  rid  of  governmental  violence  in  a society  in  which 
all  are  not  true  Christians,  will  only  result  in  the  wicked 
dominating  the  good  and  oppressing  them  with  impunity,” 
say  the  champions  of  the  existing  order  of  things.  But  it 
has  never  been,  and  cannot  be  otherwise.  So  it  has  always 
been  from  the  beginning  of  the  world,  and  so  it  is  still. 
The  wicked  ivill  always  dominaie  the  good,  and  will  always 
oppress  them.  Cain  overpowered  Abel,  the  cunning  Jacob 
oppressed  the  guileless  Esau  and  was  in  his  turn  deceived 
by  Laban,  Caiaphas  and  Pilate  oppressed  Christ,  the 
Roman  emperors  oppressed  Seneca,  Epictetus,  and  the 
good  Romans  who  lived  in  their  times.  John  IV.  with  his 
favorites,  the  syphilitic  drunken  Peter  with  his  buffoons,  the 
vicious  Catherine  with  her  paramours,  ruled  and  oppressed 
the  industrious  religious  Russians  of  their  times. 

William  is  ruling  over  the  Germans,  Stambouloff  over 
the  Bulgarians,  the  Russian  officials  over  the  Russian 
people.  The  Germans  have  dominated  the  Italians,  now 
they  dominate  the  Hungarians  and  Slavonians  ; the  Turks 
have  dominated  and  still  dominate  the  Slavonians  and 
Greeks  ; the  English  dominate  the  Hindoos,  the  Mongo- 
lians dominate  the  Chinese. 

So  that  whether  governmental  violence  is  suppressed  or 
not,  the  position  of  good  men,  in  being  oppressed  by  the 
wicked,  will  be  unchanged. 

To  terrify  men  with  the  prospect  of  the  wicked  dominat- 
ing the  good  is  impossible,  for  that  is  just  what  has  always 
been,  and  is  now,  and  cannot  but  be. 

The  whole  history  of  pagan  times  is  nothing  but  a recital 
of  the  incidents  and  means  by  which  the  more  wicked 
gained  possession  of  power  over  the  less  wicked,  and 
retained  it  by  cruelties  and  deceptions,  ruling  over  the  good 
under  the  pretense  of  guarding  the  right  and  protecting  the 


IS  WITHIN-  YOU." 


245 


good  from  the  wicked.  All  the  revolutions  in  history  are 
only  examples  of  the  more  wicked  seizing  power  and 
oppressing  the  good.  In  declaring  that  if  their  authority 
did  not  exist  the  more  wicked  would  oppress  the  good,  the 
ruling  authorities  only  show  their  disinclination  to  let 
other  oppressors  come  to  power  who  would  like  to  snatch 
it  from  them. 

But  in  asserting  this  they  only  accuse  themselves.  They 
say  that  their  power,  /.  e.,  violence,  is  needed  to  defend 
men  from  other  possible  oppressors  in  the  present  or  the 
future.* 

The  weakness  of  the  use  of  violence  lies  in  the  fact  that 
all  the  arguments  brought  forward  by  oppressors  in  their 
own  defense  can  with  even  better  reason  be  advanced 
against  them.  They  plead  the  danger  of  violence — most 
often  imagined  in  the  future — but  they  are  all  the  while 
continuing  to  practice  actual  violence  themselves.  “ You 
say  that  men  used  to  pillage  and  murder  in  the  past,  and 
that  you  are  afraid  that  they  will  pillage  and  murder  one 
another  if  your  power  were  no  more.  That  may  happen — 
or  it  may  not  happen.  But  the  fact  that  you  ruin  thou- 
sands of  men  in  prisons,  fortresses,  galleys,  and  exile,  break 
up  millions  of  families  and  ruin  millions  of  men,  physically 
as  well  as  morally,  in  the  army,  that  fact  is  not  an  imaginary 
but  a real  act  of  violence,  which,  according  to  your  own 
argument,  one  ought  to  oppose  by  violence.  And  so  you 
are  yourselves  these  wicked  men  against  whom,  according 

* I may  quote  in  this  connection  the  amazingly  naive  and  comic  decla- 
ration of  the  Russian  authorities,  the  oppressors  of  other  nationalities — 
the  Poles,  the  Germans  of  the  Baltic  provinces,  and  the  Jews.  The 
Russian  Government  has  oppressed  its  subjects  for  centuries,  and  has 
never  troubled  itself  about  the  Little  Russians  of  Poland,  or  the  Letts  of 
the  Baltic  provinces,  or  the  Russian  peasants,  exploited  by  everyone. 
And  now  it  has  all  of  a sudden  become  the  champion  of  the  oppressed — > 
the  very  oppressed  whpm  it  is  itself  oppressing, 


246 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


to  your  own  argument,  it  is  absolutely  necessary  to  use 
violence,”  the  oppressed  are  sure  to  say  to  their  oppressors. 
And  non-Christian  men  always  do  say,  and  think  and  act 
on  this  reasoning.  If  the  oppressed  are  more  wicked  than 
their  oppressors,  they  attack  them  and  try  to  overthrow 
them  ; and  in  favorable  circumstances  they  succeed  in 
overthrowing  them,  or  what  is  more  common,  they  rise  into 
the  ranks  of  the  oppressors  and  assist  in  their  acts  of 
violence. 

So  that  the  very  violence  which  the  champions  of  gov- 
ernment hold  up  as  a terror — pretending  that  except  for  its 
oppressive  power  the  wicked  would  oppress  the  good — has 
really  always  existed  and  will  exist  in  human  society.  And 
therefore  the  suppression  of  state  violence  cannot  in  any 
case  be  the  cause  of  increased  oppression  of  the  good  by  the 
wicked. 

If  state  violence  ceased,  there  would  be  acts  of  violence 
perhaps  on  the  part  of  different  people,  other  than  those  who 
had  done  deeds  of  violence  before.  But  the  total  amount 
of  violence  could  not  in  any  case  be  increased  by  the  mere 
fact  of  power  passing  from  one  set  of  men  to  another. 

“ State  violence  can  only  cease  when  there  are  no  more 
wicked  men  in  society,”  say  the  champions  of  the  existing 
order  of  things,  assuming  in  this  of  course  that  since  there 
will  always  be  wicked  men,  it  can  never  cease.  And  that 
would  be  right  enough  if  it  were  the  case,  as  they  assume, 
that  the  oppressors  are  always  the  best  of  men,  and  that  the 
sole  means  of  saving  men  from  evil  is  by  violence.  Then, 
indeed,  violence  could  never  cease.  But  since  this  is  not 
the  case,  but  quite  the  contrary,  that  it  is  not  the  better 
oppress  the  worse,  but  the  worse  oppress  the  better,  and 
since  violence  will  never  put  an  end  to  evil,  and  there  is, 
moreover,  another  means  of  putting  an  end  to  it,  the  asser- 
tion that  violence  will  never  cease  is  incorrect.  The  use  of 
violence  grows  less  and  less  and  evidently  must  disappear. 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


247 


But  this  will  not  come  to  pass,  as  some  champions  of  the 
existing  order  imagine,  through  the  oppressed  becoming 
better  and  better  under  the  influence  of  government  (on  the 
contrary,  its  influence  causes  their  continual  degradation), 
but  through  the  fact  that  all  men  are  constantly  growing 
better  and  better  of  themselves,  so  that  even  the  most 
wicked,  who  are  in  power,  will  become  less  and  less  wicked, 
till  at  last  they  are  so  good  as  to  be  incapable  of  using 
violence.  sj 

The  progressive  movement  of  humanity  does  not  proceed 
from  the  better  elements  in  society  seizing  power  and 
making  those  who  are  subject  to  them  better,  by  forcible 
means,  as  both  conservatives  and  revolutionists  imagine. 
It  proceeds  first  and  principally  from  the  fact  that  all  men 
in  general  are  advancing  steadily  and  undeviatingly  toward 
a more  and  more  conscious,  assimilation  of  the  Christian 
theory  of  life  ; and  secondly,  from  the  fact  that,  even 
apart  from  conscious  spiritual  life,  men  are  unconsciously 
brought  into  a more  Christian  attitude  to  life  by  the  very 
process  of  one  set  of  men  grasping  the  power,  and  again  " 
being  replaced  by  others. 

The  worse  elements  of  society,  gaining  possession  of 
power,  under  the  sobering  influence  which  always  accom- 
panies power,  grow  less  and  less  cruel,  and  become  inca- 
pable of  using  cruel  forms  of  violence.  Consequently  others 
are  able  to  seize  their  place,  and  the  same  process  of  soft- 
ening  and,  so  to  say,  unconscious  Christianizing  goes  on  with 
them.  It  is  something  like  the  process  of  ebullition.  The 
majority  of  men,  having  the  non-Christian  view  of  life, 
always  strive  for  power  and  struggle  to  obtain  it.  In  this 
struggle  the  most  cruel,  the  coarsest,  the  least  Christian 
elements  of  society  overpower  the  most  gentle,  well-dis- 
posed, and  Christian,  and  rise  by  means  of  their  violence 
to  the  upper  ranks  of  society.  And  in  them  is  Christ’s 
prophecy  fulfilled  : “ Woe  to  you  that  are  rich  ! woe  unto 


248 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


you  that  are  full  ! woe  unto  you  when  all  men  shall  speak 
well  of  you  ! ” For  the  men  who  are  in  possession  of  power 
and  all  that  results  from  it — glory  and  wealth — and  have  at- 
tained the  various  aims  they  set  before  themselves,  recog- 
nize the  vanity  of  it  all  and  return  to  the  position  from 
which  they  came.  Charles  V.,  John  IV.,  Alexander  I., 
recognizing  the  emptiness  and  the  evil  of  power,  renounced 
it  because  they  were  incapable  of  using  violence  for  their 
own  benefit  as  they  had  done. 

But  they  are  not  the  solitary  examples  of  this  recogni- 
tion of  the  emptiness  and  evil  of  power.  Everyone  who 
gains  a position  of  power  he  has  striven  for,  every  general, 
every  minister,  every  millionaire,  every  petty  official  who 
has  gained  the  place  he  has  coveted  for  ten  years,  every 
rich  peasant  who  has  laid  by  some  hundred  rubles,  passes 
through  this  unconscious  process  of  softening. 

And  not  only  individual  men,  but  societies  of  men,  whole 
nations,  pass  through  this  process. 

The  seductions  of  power,  and  all  the  wealth,  honor,  and 
luxury  it  gives,  seem  a sufficient  aim  for  men’s  efforts  only 
so  long  as  they  are  unattained.  Directly  a man  reaches 
them  he  sees  all  their  vanity,  and  they  gradually  lose  all 
their  power  of  attraction.  They  are  like  clouds  which  have 
form  and  beauty  only  from  the  distance  ; directly  one  as- 
cends into  them,  all  their  splendor  vanishes. 

Men  who  are  in  possession  of  power  and  wealth,  some- 
times even  those  who  have  gained  for  themselves  their 
power  and  wealth,  but  more  often  their  heirs,  cease  to  be 
so  eager  for  power,  and  so  cruel  in  their  efforts  to  obtain  it. 

Having  learnt  by  experience,  under  the  operation  of 
Christian  influence,  the  vanity  of  all  that  is  gained  by  vio- 
lence, men  sometimes  in  one,  sometimes  in  several  genera- 
tions lose  the  vices  which  are  generated  by  the  passion  for 
power  and  wealth.  They  become  less  cruel  and  so  cannot 
maintain  their  position,  and  are  expelled  from  power  by 


IS  V/ITHIM  YOU. 


249 


Others  less  Christian  and  more  wicked.  Thus  they  return 
to  a rank  of  society  lower  in  position,  but  higher  in  morality, 
raising  thereby  the  average  level  of  Christian  consciousness 
in  men.  But  directly  after  them  again  the  worst,  coarsest, 
least  Christian  elements  of  society  rise  to  the  top,  and  are 
subjected  to  the  same  process  as  their  predecessors,  and 
again  in  a generation  or  so,  seeing  the  vanity  of  what  is 
gained  by  violence,  and  having  imbibed  Christianity,  they 
come  down  again  among  the  oppressed,  and  their  place  is 
again  filled  by  new  oppressors,  less  brutal  than  former  op- 
pressors, though  more  so  than  those  they  oppress.  So 
that,  although  power  remains  externally  the  same  as  it  was, 
with  every  change  of  the  men  in  power  there  is  a constant 
increase  of  the  number  of  men  who  have  been  brought  by 
experience  to  the  necessity  of  assimilating  the  Christian 
conception  of  life,  and  with  every  change — though  it  is  the 
coarsest,  cruelest,  and  least  Christian  who  come  into  pos- 
session of  power,  they  are  less  coarse  and  cruel  and  more 
Christian  than  their  predecessors  when  they  gained  posses- 
sion of  power. 

Power  selects  and  attracts  the  worst  elements  of  society, 
transforms  them,  improves  and  softens  them,  and  returns 
them  to  society.  ’ 

Such  is  the  process  by  means  of  which  Christianity,  in 
spite  of  the  hindrances  to  human  progress  resulting  from 
the  violence  of  power,  gains  more  and  more  hold  of  men, 
Christianity  penetrates  to  the  consciousness  of  men,  not 
only  in  spite  of  the  violence  of  power,  but  also  by  means  of 
it. 

And  therefore  the  assertion  of  the  champions  of  the 
state,  that  if  the  power  of  government  were  suppressed  the 
wicked  would  oppress  the  good,  not  only  fails  to  show  that 
that  is  to  be  dreaded,  since  it  is  just  what  happens  now, 
but  proves,  on  the  contrary,  that  it  is  governmental  power 
which  enables  the  wicked  to  oppress  the  good,  and  is  the 


250 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


evil  most  desirable  to  suppress,  and  that  it  is  being  gradu- 
ally  suppressed  in  the  natural  course  of  things. 

“But  if  it  be  true  that  governmental  power  will  disap. 
pear  when  those  in  power  become  so  Christian  that  they 
renounce  power  of  their  own  accord,  and  there  are  no  men 
found  willing  to  take  their  place,  and  even  if  this  process 
I is  already  going  on,”  say  the  champions  of  the  existing 
I order,  “when  will  that  come  to  pass?  If,  after  eighteen 
hundred  years,  there  are  still  so  many  eager  for  power,  and 
so  few  anxious  to  obey,  there  seems  no  likelihood  of  its 
i happening  very  soon — or  indeed  of  its  ever  happening  at 

L 

“ Even  if  there  are,  as  there  have  always  been,  some  men 
who  prefer  renouncing  power  to  enjoying  it,  the  mass  of 
men  in  reserve,  who  prefer  dominion  to  subjection,  is  so 
great  that  it  is  difficult  to  imagine  a time  when  the  number 
will  be  exhausted. 

“Before  this  Christianizing  process  could  so  affect  all 
men  one  after  another  that  they  would  pass  from  the 
heathen  to  the  Christian  conception  of  life,  and  would 
voluntarily  abandon  power  and  wealth,  it  would  be  neces- 
sary that  all  the  coarse,  half-savage  men,  completely  inca- 
pable of  appreciating  Christianity  or  acting  upon  it,  of 
whom  there  are  always  a great  many  in  every  Christian 
society,  should  be  converted  to  Christianity.  More  than 
this,  all  the  savage  and  absolutely  non-Christian  peoples, 
who  are  so  numerous  outside  the  Christian  world,  must 
also  be  converted.  And  therefore,  even  if  we  admit  that 
this  Christianizing  process  will  some  day  affect  everyone, 
still,  judging  by  the  amount  of  progress  it  has  made  in 
eighteen  hundred  years,  it  will  be  many  times  eighteen 
centuries  before  it  will  do  so.  And  it  is  therefore  impos- 
sible and  unprofitable  to  think  at  present  of  anything  so 
impracticable  as  the  suppression  of  authority.  We  ought 
only  to  try  to  put  authority  into  the  best  hands.” 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


251 


And  this  criticism  would  be  perfectly  just,  if  the  transi- 
tion from  one  conception  of  life  to  another  were  only 
accomplished  by  the  single  process  of  all  men,  separately 
and  successively,  realizing,  each  for  himself,  the  emptiness 
of  power,  and  reaching  Christian  truth  by  the  inner  spiritual 
path.  That  process  goes  on  unceasingly,  and  men  are 
passing  over  to  Christianity  one  after  another  by  this  innet-— ^ 
way. 

But  there  is  also  another  external  means  by  which  men 
reach  Christianity  and  by  which  the  transition  is  less 
gradual. 

This  transition  from  one  organization  of  life  to  another  . 
is  not  accomplished  by  degrees  like  the  sand  running 
through  the  hourglass  grain  after  grain.  It  is  more  like 
the  water  filling  a vessel  floating  on  water.  At  first  the 
water  only  runs  in  slowly  on  one  side,  but  as  the  vessel 
grows  heavier  it  suddenly  begins  to  sink,  and  almos^' 
instantaneously  fills  with  water. 

It  is  just  the  same  with  the  transitions  of  mankind  from 
one  conception — and  so  from  one  organization  of  life — to 
another.  At  first  only  gradually  and  slowly,  one  after 
another,  men  attain  to  the  new  truth  by  the  inner  spiritual 
way,  and  follow  it  out  in  life.  But  when  a certain  point  in 
the  diffusion  of  the  truth  has  been  reached,  it  is  suddenly 
assimilated  by  everyone,  not  by  the  inner  way,  but,  as  it 
were,  involuntarily. 

That  is  why  the  champions  of  the  existing  order  are 
wrong  in  arguing  that,  since  only  a small  section  of  man- 
kind has  passed  over  to  Christianity  in  eighteen  centuries, 
it  must  be  many  times  eighteen  centuries  before  all  the 
remainder  do  the  same.  For  in  that  argument  they  do  not 
take  into  account  any  other  means,  besides  the  inward 
spiritual  one,  by  which  men  assimilate  a new  truth  and  pass 
from  one  order  of  life  to  another. 

Men  do  not  only  assimilate  a truth  through  recognizing 


252 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  COD 


it  by  prophetic  insight,  or  by  experience  of  life.  When 
the  truth  has  become  sufficiently  widely  diffused,  men  at  a 
lower  stage  of  development  accept  it  all  at  once  simply 
through  confidence  in  those  who  have  reached  it  by  the 
inner  spiritual  wa}^  and  are  applying  it  to  life. 

Every  new  truth,  by  which  the  order  of  human  life  is 
changed  and  humanity  is  advanced,  is  at  first  accepted  by 
only  a very  small  number  of  men  who  understand  it  through 
inner  spiritual  intuition.  The  remainder  of  mankind  who 
accepted  on  trust  the  preceding  truth  on  which  the  exist- 
ing order  is  based,  are  always  opposed  to  the  diffusion  of 
the  new  truth. 

But  seeing  that,  to  begin  with,  men  do  not  stand  still, 
but  are  steadily  advancing  to  a greater  recognition  of  the 
truth  and  a closer  adaptation  of  their  life  to  it,  and  secondly, 
all  men  in  varying  degrees  according  to  their  age,  their 
education,  and  their  race  are  capable  of  understanding  the 
new  truths,  at  first  those  who  are  nearest  to  the  men  who 
have  attained  the  new  truth  by  spiritual  intuition,  slowly 
and  one  by  one,  but  afterward  more  and  more  quickly,  pass 
over  to  the  new  truth.  Thus  the  number  of  men  who 
accept  the  new  truth  becomes  greater  and  greater,  and  the 
truth  becomes  more  and  more  comprehensible. 

And  thus  more  confidence  is  aroused  in  the  remainder, 
who  are  at  a less  advanced  stage  of  capacity  for  under- 
standing the  truth.  And  it  becomes  easier  for  them  to 
grasp  it,  and  an  increasing  number  accept  it. 

And  so  the  movement  goes  on  more  and  more  quickly, 
and  on  an  ever-increasing  scale,  like  a snowball,  till  at 
last  a public  opinion  in  harmony  with  the  new  truth  is 
created,  and  then  the  whole  mass  of  men  is  carried  over  all 
at  once  by  its  momentum  to  the  new  truth  and  establishes 
a new  social  order  in  accordance  with  it. 

Those  men  who  accept  a new  truth  when  it  has  gained  a 
certain  degree  of  acceptance,  always  pass  over  all  at  once 


75  WITHIN-  YOU." 


253 


in  masses.  They  are  like  the  ballast  with  which  every  ship 
is  always  loaded,  at  once  to  keep  it  upright  and  enable  it 
to  sail  properly.  If  there  were  no  ballast,  the  ship  would 
not  be  low  enough  in  the  water,  and  would  shift  its  position 
at  the  slightest  change  in  its  conditions.  This  ballast, 
which  strikes  one  at  first  as  superfluous  and  even  as  hinder- 
ing the  progress  of  the  vessel,  is  really  indispensable  to  its 
good  navigation. 

It  is  the  same  with  the  mass  of  mankind,  who  not  indi- 
vidually, but  always  in  a mass,  under  the  influence  of  a 
new  social  idea  pass  all  at  once  from  one  organization  of 
life  to  another.  This  mass  always  hinders,  by  its  inertia, 
frequent  and  rapid  revolutions  in  the  social  order  which 
have  not  been  sufficiently  proved  by  human  experience. 
And  it  delays  every  truth  a long  while  till  it  has  stood  the 
test  of  prolonged  struggles,  and  has  thoroughly  permeated 
the  consciousness  of  humanity. 

And  that  is  why  it  is  a mistake  to  say  that  because  only 
a very  small  minority  of  men  has  assimilated  Christianity 
in  eighteen  centuries,  it  must  take  many  times  as  many 
centuries  for  all  mankind  to  assimilate  it,  and  that  since 
that  time  is  so  far  off,  we  who  live  in  the  present  need  not 
even  think  about  it.  It  is  a mistake,  because  the  men  at 
a lower  stage  of  culture,  the  men  and  the  nations  who  are 
represented  as  the  obstacle  to  the  realization  of  the  Chris- 
tian order  of  life,  are  the  very  people  who  always  pass  over 
in  masses  all  at  once  to  any  truth  that  has  once  been  recog- 
nized by  public  opinion. 

And  therefore  the  transformation  of  human  life,  through 
which  men  in  power  will  renounce  it,  and  there  will  be  none 
anxious  to  take  their  place,  will  not  come  only  by  all  men 
consciously  and  separately  assimilating  the  Christian  con- 
ception of  life.  It  will  come  when  a Christian  public 
opinion  has  arisen,  so  definite  and  easily  comprehensible 
as  to  reach  the  whole  of  the  inert  mass,  which  is  not  able 


2S4 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


( i 


to  attain  truth  by  its  own  intuition,  and  therefore  is  always 
under  the  sway  of  public  opinion. 

Public  opinion  arises  spontaneously  and  spreads  for 
hundreds  and  thousands  of  years,  but  it  has  the  power  of 
working  on  men  by  infection,  and  with  great  rapidity  gains 
a hold  on  great  numbers  of  men. 

“ But,”  say  the  champions  of  the  existing  order,  “ even 
if  it  is  true  that  public  opinion,  when  it  has  attained  a 
certain  degree  of  definiteness  and  precision,  can  convert 
the  inert  mass  of  men  outside  the  Christian  world — the 
non-Christian  races — as  well  as  the  coarse  and  depraved 
who  are  living  in  its  midst,  what  proofs  have  we  that  this 
Christian  public  opinion  has  arisen  and  is  able  to  replace 
force  and  render  it  unnecessary. 

“ We  must  not  give  up  force,  by  which  the  existing  order 
is  maintained,  and  by  relying  on  the  vague  and  impalpable 
influence  of  public  opinion  expose  Christians  to  the  risk  of 
being  pillaged,  murdered,  and  outraged  in  every  way  by  the 
savages  inside  and  outside  of  civilized  society. 

“ Since,  even  supported  by  the  use  of  force,  we  can 
hardly  control  the  non-Christian  elements  which  are  always 
ready  to  pour  down  on  us  and  to  destroy  all  that  has  been 
gained  by  civilization,  is  it  likely  that  public  opinion  could 
take  the  place  of  force  and  render  us  secure  ? And  be- 
sides, how  are  we  to  find  the  moment  when  public  opinion 
has  become  strong  enough  to  be  able  to  replace  the  use  of 
force?  To  reject  the  use  of  force  and  trust  to  public 
opinion  to  defend  us  would  be  as  insane  as  to  remove  all 
weapons  of  defense  in  a menagerie,  and  then  to  let  loose 
all  the  lions  and  tigers,  relying  on  the  fact  that  the  animals 
seemed  peaceable  when  kept  in  their  cages  and  held  in 
check  by  red-hot  irons.  And  therefore  people  in  power, 
who  have  been  put  in  positions  of  authority  by  fate  or  by 
God,  have  not  the  right  to  run  the  risk,  ruining  all  that  has 
been  gained  by  civilization,  just  because  they  want  to  try 


IS  WITHIN  YOU."  255 

an  experiment  to  see  whether  public  opinion  is  or  is  not 
able  to  replace  the  protection  given  by  authority.” 

A French  writer,  forgotten  now,  Alphonse  Karr,  said 
somewhere,  trying  to  show  the  impossibility  of  doing  away 
with  the  death  penalty  : “Que  messieurs  les  assassins  com- 
mencent  par  nous  donner  I’exemple.”  Often  have  I heard 
this  bon  inot  repeated  by  men  who  thought  that  these  words 
were  a witty  and  convincing  argument  against  the  abolition 
of  capital  punishment.  And  yet  all  the  erroneousness  of 
the  argument  of  those  who  consider  that  governments  can- 
not give  up  the  use  off  force  till  all  people  are  capable  of 
doing  the  same,  could  not  be  more  clearly  expressed  than 
it  is  in  that  epigram. 

“ Let  the  murderers,”  say  the  champions  of  state  violence, 
“ set  us  the  example  by  giving  up  murder  and  then  we  will 
give  it  up.”  But  the  murderers  say  just  the  same,  only 
with  much  more  right.  They  say : “ Let  those  who  have 
undertaken  to  teach  us  and  guide  us  set  us  the  example  of 
giving  up  legal  murder,  and  then  we  will  Imitate  them.” 
And  they  say  this,  not  as  a jest,  but  seriously,  because  it  is 
the  actual  state  of  the  case. 

“ We  cannot  give  up  the  use  of  violence,  because  we  are 
surrounded  by  violent  ruffians.”  Nothing  in  our  days 
hinders  the  progress  of  humanity  and  the  establishment 
of  the  organization  corresponding  to  its  present  develop- 
ment more  than  this  false  reasoning.  Those  in  authority 
are  convinced  that  men  are  only  guided  and  only  progress 
through  the  use  of  force,  and  therefore  they  confidently 
make  use  of  it  to  support  the  existing  organization.  The 
existing  order  is  maintained,  not  by  force,  but  by  public 
opinion,  the  action  of  which  is  disturbed  by  the  use  of 
force.  So  that  the  effect  of  using  force  is  to  disturb  and 
to  weaken  the  very  thing  it  tries  to  maintain. 

Violence,  even  in  the  most  favorable  case,  when  it  is  not 
used  simply  for  some  personal  aims  of  those  in  power. 


256 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


always  punishes  under  the  one  inelastic  formula  of  the  law 
what  has  long  before  been  condemned  by  public  opinion. 
But  there  is  this  difference,  that  while  public  opinion  cen- 
sures and  condemns  all  the  acts  opposed  to  the  moral  law, 
including  the  most  varied  cases  in  its  reprobation,  the  law 
which  rests  on  violence  only  condemns  and  punishes  a cer- 
tain very  limited  range  of  acts,  and  by  so  doing  seems  to 
justify  all  other  acts  of  the  same  kind  which  do  not  come 
under  its  scope. 

Public  opinion  ever  since  the  time  of  Moses  has  regarded 
covetousness,  profligacy,  and  cruelty  as  wrong,  and  cen- 
sured them  accordingly.  And  it  condemns  every  kind  of 
manifestation  of  covetousness,  not  only  the  appropriation  of 
the  property  of  others  by  force  or  fraud  or  trickery,  but 
even  the  cruel  abuse  of  wealth  ; it  condemns  every  form  of 
profligacy,  whether  with  concubine,  slave,  divorced  woman, 
or  even  one’s  own  wife  ; it  condemns  every  kind  of  cruelty, 
whether  shown  in  blows,  in  ill-treatment,  or  in  murder,  not 
only  of  men,  but  even  of  animals.  The  law  resting  on  force 
only  punishes  certain  forms  of  covetousness,  such  as  rob- 
bery and  swindling,  certain  forms  of  profligacy  and  cruelty, 
such  as  conjugal  infidelity,  murder,  and  wounding.  And  in 
this  way  it  seems  to  countenance  all  the  manifestations  of 
covetousness,  profligacy,  and  cruelty  which  do  not  come 
under  its  narrow  definition. 

But  besides  corrupting  public  opinion,  the  use  of  force 
leads  men  to  the  fatal  conviction  that  they  progress,  not 
through  the  spiritual  impulse  which  impels  them  to  the  at- 
tainment of  truth  and  its  realization  in  life,  and  which  con- 
stitutes the  only  source  of  every  progressive  movement  of 
humanity,  but  by  means  of  violence,  the  very  force  which, 
far  from  leading  men  to  truth,  always  carries  them  further 
away  from  it.  This  is  a fatal  error,  because  it  leads  men  to 
neglect  the  chief  force  underlying  their  life — their  spiritual 
activity — and  to  turn  all  their  attention  and  energy  to  the 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


257 


use  of  violence,  which  is  superficial,  sluggish,  and  most 
generally  pernicious  in  its  action. 

They  make  the  same  mistake  as  men  who,  trying  to  set 
a steam  engine  in  motion,  should  turn  its  wheels  round  with 
their  hands,  not  suspecting  that  the  underlying  cause  of  its 
movement  was  the  expansion  of  the  steam,  and  not  the 
motion  of  the  wheels.  By  turning  the  wheels  by  hand  and 
by  levers  they  could  only  produce  a semblance  of  move- 
ment, and  meantime  they  would  be  wrenching  the  wheels 
and  so  preventing  their  being  fit  for  real  movement. 

That  is  just  what  people  are  doing  who  think  to  make 
men  advance  by  means  of  external  force. 

They  say  that  the  Christian  life  cannot  be  established 
without  the  use  of  violence,  because  there  are  savage  races 
outside  the  pale  of  Christian  societies  in  Africa  and  in 
Asia  (there  are  some  who  even  represent  the  Chinese  as  a 
danger  to  civilization),  and  that  in  the  midst  of  Christian 
societies  there  are  savage,  corrupt,  and,  according  to  the 
new  theory  of  heredity,  congenital  criminals.  And  vio- 
lence, they  say,  is  necessary  to  keep  savages  and  criminals 
from  annihilating  our  civilization. 

But  these  savages  within  and  without  Christian  society, 
who  are  such  a terror  to  us,  have  never  been  subjugated  by 
violence,  and  are  not  subjugated  by  it  now.  Nations  have 
never  subjugated  other  nations  by  violence  alone.  If  a 
nation  which  subjugated  another  was  on  a lower  level  of 
civilization,  it  has  never  happened  that  it  succeeded  in 
introducing  its  organization  of  life  by  violence.  On  the 
contrary,  it  was  always  forced  to  adopt  the  organization  of 
life  existing  in  the  conquered  nation.  If  ever  any  of  the 
nations  conquered  by  force  have  been  really  subjugated,  or 
even  nearly  so,  it  has  always  been  by  the  action  of  public 
opinion,  and  never  by  violence,  which  only  tends  to  drive  a 
people  to  further  rebellion. 

When  whole  nations  have  been  subjugated  by  a new 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


258 

religion,  and  have  become  Christian  or  Mohammedan,  such 
a conversion  has  never  been  brought  about  because  the 
authorities  made  it  obligatory  (on  the  contrary,  violence  has 
much  oftener  acted  in  the  opposite  direction),  but  because 
public  opinion  made  such  a change  inevitable.  Nations,  on 
the  contrary,  who  have  been  driven  by  force  to  accept  the 
faith  of  their  conquerors  have  always  remained  antagonistic 
to  it. 

It  is  just  the  same  with  the  savage  elements  existing  in 
the  midst  of  our  civilized  societies.  Neither  the  increased 
nor  the  diminished  severity  of  punishment,  nor  the  modifi- 
cations of  prisons,  nor  the  increase  of  police  will  increase  or 
diminish  the  number  of  criminals.  Their  number  will  only 
be  diminished  by  the  change  of  the  moral  standard  of 
society.  No  severities  could  put  an  end  to  duels  and 
vendettas  in  certain  districts.  It  spite  of  the  number  of 
Tcherkesses  executed  for  robbery,  they  continue  to  be 
robbers  from  their  youth  up,  for  no  maiden  will  marry  a 
Tcherkess  youth  till  he  has  given  proof  of  his  bravery  by 
carrying  off  a horse,  or  at  least  a sheep.  If  men  cease  to 
fight  duels,  and  the  Tcherkesses  cease  to  be  robbers,  it  will 
not  be  from  fear  of  punishment  (indeed,  that  invests  the 
crime  with  additional  charm  for  youth),  but  through  a 
change  in  the  moral  standard  of  public  opinion.  It  is  the 
same  with  all  other  crimes.  Force  can  never  suppress  what 
is  sanctioned  by  public  opinion.  On  the  contrary,  public 
opinion  need  only  be  in  direct  opposition  to  force  to 
neutralize  the  whole  effect  of  the  use  of  force.  It  has 
always  been  so  and  always  will  be  in  every  case  of  martyr, 
dom. 

What  would  happen  if  force  were  not  used  against  hostile 
nations  and  the  criminal  elements  of  society  we  do  not 
know.  But  we  do  know  by  prolonged  experience  that 
neither  enemies  nor  criminals  have  been  successfully  sup- 
pressed by  force. 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


259 


And  indeed  how  could  nations  be  subjugated  by  violence 
who  are  led  by  their  whole  education,  their  traditions,  and 
even  their  religion  to  see  the  loftiest  virtue  in  warring  with 
their  oppressors  and  fighting  for  freedom  ? And  how  are 
we  to  suppress  by  force  acts  committed  in  the  midst  of  our 
society  which  are  regarded  as  crimes  by  the  government  and 
as  daring  exploits  by  the  people  ? 

To  exterminate  such  nations  and  such  criminals  by  vio- 
lence is  possible,  and  indeed  is  done,  but  to  subdue  them  is 
impossible. 

The  sole  guide  which  directs  men  and  nations  has  always 
been  and  is  the  unseen,  intangible,  underlying  force,  the 
resultant  of  all  the  spiritual  forces  of  a certain  people,  or 
of  all  humanity,  which  finds  its  outward  expression  in  pub- 
lic opinion. 

The  use  of  violence  only  weakens  this  force,  hinders  it 
and  corrupts  it,  and  tries  to  replace  it  by  another  which,  far 
from  being  conducive  to  the  progress  of  humanity,  is  detri- 
mental to  it. 

To  bring  under  the  sway  of  Christianity  all  the  savage 
nations  outside  the  pale  of  the  Christian  world — all  the 
Zulus,  Mandchoos,  and  Chinese,  whom  many  regard  as 
savages — and  the  savages  who  live  in  our  midst,  there  is 
only  one  mea?is.  That  means  is  the  propagation  among 
these  nations  of  the  Christian  ideal  of  society,  which  can 
only  be  realized  by  a Christian  life,  Christian  actions,  and 
Christian  examples.  And  meanwhile,  though  this  is  the  one 
only  means  of  gaining  a hold  over  the  people  who  have 
remained  non-Christian,  the  men  of  our  day  set  to  work  in 
the  directly  opposite  fashion  to  attain  this  result. 

To  bring  under  the  sway  of  Christianity  savage  nations 
who  do  not  attack  us  and  whom  we  have  therefore  no  excuse 
for  oppressing,  we  ought  before  all  things  to  leave  them  in 
peace,  and  in  case  we  need  or  wish  to  enter  into  closer 
relations  with  them,  we  ought  only  to  influence  them  by 


26o 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


Christian  manners  and  Christian  teaching,  setting  them  the 
example  of  the  Christian  virtues  of  patience,  meekness, 
endurance,  purity,  brotherhood,  and  love.  Instead  of  that 
we  begin  by  establishing  among  them  new  markets  for  our 
commerce,  with  the  sole  aim  of  our  own  profit ; then  we 
appropriate  their  lands,  i.  e.,  rob  them  ; then  we  sell  them 
spirits,  tobacco,  and  opium,  /.  <?.,  corrupt  them  ; then  we 
establish  our  morals  among  them,  teach  them  the  use  of 
violence  and  new  methods  of  destruction,  t.  e.,  we  teach  them 
nothing  but  the  animal  law  of  strife,  below  which  man  can- 
not sink,  and  we  do  all  we  can  to  conceal  from  them  all 
that  is  Christian  in  us.  After  this  we  send  some  dozens  of 
missionaries  prating  to  them  of  the  hypocritical  absurdities 
of  the  Church,  and  then  quote  the  failure  of  our  efforts  to 
turn  the  heathen  to  Christianity  as  an  incontrovertible  proof 
of  the  impossibility  of  applying  the  truths  of  Christianity  in 
practical  life. 

It  is  just  the  same  with  the  so-called  criminals  living  in 
our  midst.  To  bring  these  people  under  the  sway  of  Chris- 
tianity there  is  one  only  means,  that  is,  the  Christian  social 
ideal,  which  can  only  be  realized  among  them  by  true 
Christian  teaching  and  supported  by  a true  example  of  the 
Christian  life.  And  to  preach  this  Christian  truth  and  to 
support  it  by  Christian  example  we  set  up  among  them 
prisons,  guillotines,  gallows,  preparations  for  murder  ; we 
diffuse  among  the  common  herd  idolatrous  superstitions  to 
stupefy  them  ; we  sell  them  spirits,  tobacco,  and  opium  to 
brutalize  them  ; we  even  organize  legalized  prostitution  ; 
we  give  land  to  those  who  do  not  need  it ; we  make  a dis- 
play of  senseless  luxury,  in  the  midst  of  suffering  poverty  ; 
we  destroy  the  possibility  of  anything  like  a Christian  public 
opinion,  and  studiously  try  to  suppress  what  Christian  pub- 
lic opinion  is  existing.  And  then,  after  having  ourselves 
assiduously  corrupted  men,  we  shut  them  up  like  wild  beasts 
in  places  from  which  they  cannot  escape,  and  where  they 


IS  WITH  IN'  YOU." 


261 


become  still  more  brutalized,  or  else  we  kill  them.  And 
these  very  men  whom  we  have  corrupted  and  brutalized  by 
every  means,  we  bring  forward  as  a proof  that  one  cannot 
deal  with  criminals  except  by  brute  force. 

We  are  just  like  ignorant  doctors  who  put  a man,  recov- 
ering from  illness  by  the  force  of  nature,  into  the  most 
unfavorable  conditions  of  hygiene,  and  dose  him  with  the 
most  deleterious  drugs,  and  then  assert  triumphantly  that 
their  hygiene  and  their  drugs  saved  his  life,  when  the 
patient  would  have  been  well  long  before  if  they  had  left 
him  alone. 

Violence,  which  is  held  up  as  the  means  of  supporting 
the  Christian  organization  of  life,  not  only  fails  to  produce 
that  effect,  it  even  hinders  the  social  organization  of  life 
from  being  what  it  might  and  ought  to  be.  The  social 
organization  is  as  good  as  it  is  not  as  a result  of  force,  but 
in  spite  of  it. 

And  therefore  the  champions  of  the  existing  order  are 
mistaken  in  arguing  that  since,  even  with  the  aid  of  force, 
the  bad  and  non-Christian  elements  of  humanity  can  hardly 
be  kept  from  attacking  us,  the  abolition  of  the  use  of  force 
and  the  substitution  of  public  opinion  for  it  would  leave 
humanity  quite  unprotected. 

They  are  mistaken,  because  force  does  not  protect  human- 
ity, but,  on  the  contrary,  deprives  it  of  the  only  possible 
means  of  really  protecting  itself,  that  is,  the  establishment 
and  diffusion  of  a Christian  public  opinion.  Only  by  the 
suppression  of  violence  will  a Christian  public  opinion 
cease  to  be  corrupted,  and  be  enabled  to  be  diffused  with- 
out hindrance,  and  men  will  then  turn  their  efforts  in  the 
spiritual  direction  by  which  alone  they  can  advance. 

“ But  how  are  we  to  cast  off  the  visible  tangible  pro- 
tection of  an  armed  policeman,  and  trust  to  something  so 
intangible  as  public  opinion  ? Does  it  yet  exist  ? More- 
over, the  condition  of  things  in  which  we  are  living  now. 


262 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


we  know,  good  or  bad  ; we  know  its  shortcomings  and  are 
used  to  it,  we  know  what  to  do,  and  how  to  behave  under 
present  conditions.  But  what  will  happen  when  we  give 
it  up  and  trust  ourselves  to  something  invisible  and  intan- 
gible, and  altogether  unknown  ?” 

The  unknown  world  on  which  they  are  entering  in 
renouncing  their  habitual  ways  of  life  appears  itself  as 
dreadful  to  them.  It  is  all  very  well  to  dread  the  unknown 
when  our  habitual  position  is  sound  and  secure.  But  our 
position  is  so  far  from  being  secure  that  we  know,  beyond 
all  doubt,  that  we  are  standing  on  the  brink  of  a precipice. 

If  we  must  be  afraid  let  us  be  afraid  of  what  is  really 
alarming,  and  not  what  we  imagine  as  alarming. 

Fearing  to  make  the  effort  to  detach  ourselves  from  our 
perilous  position  because  the  future  is  not  fully  clear  to  us, 
we  are  like  passengers  in  a foundering  ship  who,  through 
being  afraid  to  trust  themselves  to  the  boat  which  would 
carry  them  to  the  shore,  shut  themselves  up  in  the  cabin 
and  refuse  to  come  out  of  it  ; or  like  sheep,  who,  terrified 
by  their  barn  being  on  fire,  huddle  in  a corner  and  do  not 
go  out  of  the  wide-open  door. 

We  are  standing  on  the  threshold  of  the  murderous  war 
of  social  revolution,  terrific  in  its  miseries,  beside  which,  as 
those  who  are  preparing  it  tell  us,  the  horrors  of  1793  will 
be  child’s  play.  And  can  we  talk  of  the  danger  threaten- 
ing us  from  the  warriors  of  Dahomey,  the  Zulus,  and  such, 
who  live  so  far  away  and  are  not  dreaming  of  attacking  us, 
and  from  some  thousands  of  swindlers,  thieves,  and 
murderers,  brutalized  and  corrupted  by  ourselves,  whose 
number  is  in  no  way  lessened  by  all  our  sentences,  prisons, 
and  executions  ? 

Moreover  this  dread  of  the  suppression  of  the  visible 
protection  of  the  policeman  is  essentially  a sentiment  of 
townspeople,  that  is,  of  people  who  are  living  in  abnormal 
and  artificial  conditions.  People  living  in  natural  condi- 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


263 


tions  of  life,  not  in  towns,  but  in  the  midst  of  nature,  and 
carrying  on  the  struggle  with  nature,  live  without  this  pro- 
tection and  know  how  little  force  can  protect  us  from  the 
real  dangers  with  which  we  are  surrounded.  There  is 
something  sickly  in  this  dread,  which  is  essentially  depend- 
ent on  the  artificial  conditions  in  which  many  of  us  live 
and  have  been  brought  up. 

A doctor,  a specialist  in  insanity,  told  a story  that  one 
summer  day  when  he  was  leaving  the  asylum,  the  lunatics 
accompanied  him  to  the  street  door.  “Come  for  a walk  in 
the  town  with  me  ? ” the  doctor  suggested  to  them.  The 
lunatics  agreed,  and  a small  band  followed  the  doctor. 
But  the  further  they  proceeded  along  the  street  where 
healthy  people  were  freely  moving  about,  the  more  timid 
they  became,  and  they  pressed  closer  and  closer  to  the 
doctor,  hindering  him  from  walking.  At  last  they  all  be- 
gan to  beg  him  to  take  them  back  to  the  as}dum,  to  their 
meaningless  but  customary  way  of  life,  to  their  keepers,  to 
blows,  strait  waistcoats,  and  solitary  cells. 

This  is  just  how  men  of  to-day  huddle  in  terror  and  draw 
back  to  their  irrational  manner  of  life,  their  factories,  law 
courts,  prisons,  executions,  and  wars,  when  Christianity  calls 
them  to  liberty,  to  the  free,  rational  life  of  the  future  com- 
ing age. 

People  ask,  “ How  will  our  security  be  guaranteed  when 
the  existing  organization  is  suppressed  ? What  precisely 
will  the  new  organization  be  that  is  to  replace  it  ? So  long 
as  we  do  not  know  precisely  how  our  life  will  be  organized, 
we  will  not  stir  a step  forward.” 

An  explorer  going  to  an  unknown  country  might  as  well 
ask  for  a detailed  map  of  the  country  before  he  would  start. 

If  a man,  before  he  passed  from  one  stage  to  another, 
could  know  his  future  life  in  full  detail,  he  would  have 
nothing  to  live  for.  It  is  the  same  with  the  life  of  human- 
ity. If  it  had  a programme  of  the  life  which  awaited  it 


264 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


before  entering  a new  stage,  it  would  be  the  surest  sign 
that  it  was  not  living,  nor  advancing,  but  simply  rotating  in 
the  same  place. 

The  conditions  of  the  new  order  of  life  cannot  be  known 
by  us  because  we  have  to  create  them  by  our  own  labors. 
That  is  all  that  life  is,  to  learn  the  unknown,  and  to  adapt 
our  actions  to  this  new  knowledge. 

That  is  the  life  of  each  individual  man,  and  that  is  the 
life  of  human  societies  and  of  humanity. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

THE  CHRISTIAN  CONCEPTION  OF  LIFE  HAS  ALREADY 
ARISEN  IN  OUR  SOCIETY,  AND  WILL  INFALLIBLY  PUT 
AN  END  TO  THE  PRESENT  ORGANIZATION  OF  OUR  LIFE 
BASED  ON  FORCE — WHEN  THAT  WILL  BE. 

The  Condition  and  Organization  of  our  Society  are  Terrible,  but  they 
Rest  only  on  Public  Opinion,  and  can  be  Destroyed  by  it — Already 
Violence  is  Regarded  from  a Different  Point'  of  View  ; the  Number  of 
those  who  are  Ready  to  Serve  the  Government  is  Diminishing  ; and 
even  the  Servants  of  Government  are  Ashamed  of  their  Position,  and 
so  often  Do  Not  Perform  their  Duties — These  Facts  are  all  Signs  of 
the  Rise  of  a Public  Opinion,  which  Continually  Growing  will  Lead  to 
No  One  being  Willing  to  Enter  Government  Service — Moreover,  it 
Becomes  More  and  More  Evident  that  those  Offices  are  of  No  Practical 
Use — Men  already  Begin  to  Understand  the  Futility  of  all  Institutions 
Based  on  Violence,  and  if  a Few  already  Understand  it,  All  will  One 
Day  Understand  it — The  Day  of  Deliverance  is  Unknown,  but  it 
Depends  on  Men  Themselves,  on  how  far  Each  Man  Lives  According 
to  the  Light  that  is  in  Him. 

The  position  of  Christian  humanity  with  its  prisons, 
galleys, ^Fbbets,  its  factories  and  accumulation  of  capital, 
its  taxes,  churches,  gin-palaces,  licensed  brothels,  its  eYer- 
increasing  armament  and  its  millions  of  brutalized  men, 
ready,  like  chained  dogs,  to  attack  anyone  against  whom 


Is  WITHIM  you:'' 


265 


their  master  incites  them,  would  be  terrible  indeed  if  it 
were  the  product  of  violence,  but  it  is_pre-eminenlly  the 
product  of  public  opinion.  And  what  has  been  established 
by  public  opinion  can  be  destroyed  by  public  opinion — and, 
indeed,  is  being  destroyed  by  public  opinion. 

Money  lavished  by  hundreds  of  millions,  tens  of  millions 
of  disciplined  troops,  weapons  of  astounding  destructive 
power,  all  organizations  carried  to  the  highest  point  of 
perfection,  a whole  army  of  men  charged  with  the  task  of 
deluding  and  hypnotizing  the  people,  and  all  this,  by  means 
of  electricity  which  annihilates  distance,  under  the  diiect 
control  of  men  who  regard  such  an  organization  of  society 
not  only  as  necessary  for  profit,  but  even  for  self-preserva- 
tion, and  therefore  exert  every  effort  of  their  ingenuity  to 
preserve  it — what  an  invincible  power  it  would  seem  ! 
And  yet  we  need  only  imagine  for  a moment  what  will 
really  inevitably  come  to  pass,  that  is,^he  Christian  socialj 
standard  replacing  the  heathen  social  .standard  and  estab- 
lished with  the  same  power  and  universality,  and  the 
majority  of  men  as  much  ashamed  of  taking  any  part  in 
violence  or  in  profiting  by  it,  as  they  are  to-day  of  thiev- 
ing, swindling,  begging,  and  cowardice  ; and  at  once  we 
see  the  whole  of  this  complex,  and  seemingly  powerful 
organization  of  society  falls  into  ruins  of  itself  without  a 
struggle. 

And  to  bring  this  to  pass,  nothing  new  need  be  brought 
before  men’s  minds.  Only  let  the  mist,  which  veils  fiom 
men’s  eyes  the  true  meaning  of  certain  acts  of  violence, 
pass  away,  and  the  Christianpiiblic  opin^n  which  is  spring- 
ing up  would  overpowm'  flTe''^^tinct  public  opinion  which 
permitted  and  justified  acts  of  violence.  People  need  only| 
come  to  be  as  much  ashamed  to  do  deeds  of  violence,  to 
assist  in  them  or  to  profit  by  them,  as  they  now  aie  of 
being,  or  being  reputed  a swindler,  a thief,  a coward,  or  a 
beggar.  jAnd  already  this  change  is  beginning  to  take 


266 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


place.  We  do  not  notice  it  just  as  we  do  not  notice  the 
movement  of  the  earth,  because  we  are  moved  together 
with  everything  around  us. 

It  is  true  that  the  organization  of  society  remains  in  its 
principal  features  just  as  much  an  organization  based  on 
violence  as  it  was  one  thousand  years  ago,  and  even  in  some 
respects,  especially  in  the  preparation  for  war  and  in  war 
itself,  it  appears  still  more  brutal.  But  the  rising  Christian 
ideal,  which  must  at  a certain  stage  of  development  replace 
the  heathen  ideal  of  life,  already  makes  its  influence  felt. 
A dead  tree  stands  apparently  as  firmly  as  ever — it  may  even 
seem  firmer  because  it  is  harder — but  it  is  rotten  at  the 
core,  and  soon  must  fall.  It  is  just  so  with  the  present 
order  of  society,  based  on  force.  The  external  aspect  is 
unchanged.  There  is  the  same  division  of  oppressors  and 
oppressed,  but  their  view  of  the  significance  and  dignity  of 
their  respective  positions  is  no  longer  what  it  once  was. 

The  oppressors,  that  is,  those  who  take  part  in  govern- 
ment, and  those  who  profit  by  oppression,  that  is,  the  rich, 
no  longer  imagine,  as  they  once  did,  that  they  are  the  elect 
of  the  world,  and  that  they  constitute  the  ideal  of  human 
happiness  and  greatness,  to  attain  which  was  once  the 
highest  aim  of  the  oppressed. 

Very  often  now  it  is  not  the  oppressed  who  strive  to 
attain  the  position  of  the  oppressors,  and  try  to  imitate 
them,  but  on  the  contrary  the  oppressors  who  voluntarily 
abandon  the  advantages  of  their  position,  prefer  the  con- 
dition of  the  oppressed,  and  try  to  resemble  them  in  the 
simplicity  of  their  life. 

Not  to  speak  of  the  duties  and  occupations  now  openly 
despised,  such  as  that  of  spy,  agent  of  secret  police,  money- 
lender, and  publican,  there  are  a great  number  of  professions 
formerly  regarded  as  honorable,  such  as  those  of  police 
officials,  courtiers,  judges,  and  administrative  functionaries, 
clergymen,  military  officers,  speculators,  and  bankers,  which 


IS  IVITHIM  YOU." 


267 


are  no  longer  considered  desirable  positions  by  everyone, 
and  are  even  despised  by  a special  circle  of  the  most 
respected  people.  There  are  already  men  who  voluntarily 
abandon  these  professions  which  were  once  reckoned  irre- 
proachable, and  prefer  less  lucrative  callings  which  are  in 
no  way  connected  with  the  use  of  force. 

And  there  are  even  rich  men  who,  not  through  religious 
sentiment,  but  simply  through  special  sensitiveness  to  the 
social  standard  that  is  springing  up,  relinquish  their  in- 
herited property,  believing  that  a man  can  only  justly  con- 
sume what  he  has  gained  by  his  own  labor. 

The  position  of  a government  official  or  of  a rich  man  is 
no  longer,  as  it  once  was,  and  still  is  among  non-Christian 
peoples,  regarded  as  necessarily  honorable  and  deserving  of 
respect,  and  under  the  special  blessing  of  God.  The  most 
delicate  and  moral  people  (they  are  generally  also  the  most 
cultivated)  avoid  such  positions  and  prefer  more  humble 
callings  that  are  not  dependent  on  the  use  of  force. 

The  best  of  our  young  people,  at  the  age  when  they  are 
still  uncorrupted  by  life  and  are  choosing  a career,  prefer 
the  calling  of  doctor,  engineer,  teacher,  artist,  writer,  or 
even  that  of  simple  farmer  living  on  his  own  labor,  to  legal, 
administrative,  clerical,  and  military  positions  in  the  pay  of 
government,  or  to  an  idle  existence  living  on  their  incomes. 

Monuments  and  memorials  in  these  days  are  mostly  not 
erected  in  honor  of  government  dignitaries,  or  generals,  or 
still  less  of  rich  men,  but  rather  of  artists,  men  of  science, 
and  inventors,  persons  who  have  nothing  in  common  with 
the  government,  and  often  have  even  been  in  conflict  with 
it.  They  are  the  men  whose  praises  are  celebrated  in 
poetry,  who  are  honored  by  sculpture  and  received  with 
triumphant  jubilations. 

The  best  men  of  our  day  are  all  striving  for  such  places 
of  honor.  Consequently  the  class  from  which  the  wealthy 
and  the  government  officials  are  drawn  grows  less  in  num- 


268 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


ber  and  lower  in  intelligence  and  education,  and  still  more 
in  moral  qualities.  So  that  nowadays  the  wealthy  class 
and  men  at  the  head  of  government  do  not  constitute,  as 
they  did  in  former  days,  the  dite  of  society  ; on  the  con- 
trary, they  are  inferior  to  the  middle  class. 

In  Russia  and  Turkey  as  in  America  and  France,  how- 
ever often  the  government  change  its  officials,  the  majority 
of  them  are  self-seeking  and  corrupt,  of  so  low  a moral 
standard  that  they  do  not  even  come  up  the  elementary 
requirements  of  common  honesty  expected  by  the  govern- 
ment. One  may  often  nowadays  hear  from  persons  in 
authority  the  naive  complaint  that  the  best  people  are 
always,  by  some  strange — as  it  seems  to  them — fatality,  to 
be  found  in  the  camp  of  the  opposition.  As  though  men 
were  to  complain  that  those  who  accepted  the  office  of 
hangman  were — by  some  strange  fatality — all  persons  of 
very  little  refinement  or  beauty  of  character. 

The  most  cultivated  and  refined  people  of  our  society  are 
not  nowadays  to  be  found  among  the  very  rich,  as  used 
formerly  to  be  the  rule.  The  rich  are  mostly  coarse  money 
grubbers,  absorbed  only,  in  increasing  their  hoard,  generally 
by  dishonest  means,  or  else  the  degenerate  heirs  of  such 
money  grubbers,  who,  far  from  playing  any  prominent  part 
in  society,  are  mostly  treated  with  general  contempt. 

And  besides  the  fact  that  the  class  from  which  the 
servants  of  government  and  the  wealthy  are  drawn  grows 
less  in  number  and  lower  in  caliber,  they  no  longer  them- 
selves attach  the  same  importance  to  their  positions  as  they 
once  did  ; often  they  are  ashamed  of  the  ignominy  of  their 
calling  and  do  not  perform  the  duties  they  are  bound  to 
perform  in  their  position.  Kings  and  emperors  scarcely 
govern  at  all ; they  scarcely  ever  decide  upon  an  internal 
reform  or  a new  departure  in  foreign  politics.  They  mostly 
leave  the  decision  of  such  questions  to  government  institu- 
tions or  to  public  opinion.  All  their  duties  are  reduced  to 


/S  WITHIN  YOU. 


269 


representing  the  unity  and  majesty  of  government.  And 
even  this  duty  they  perform  less  and  less  successfully. 
The  majority  of  them  do  not  keep  up  their  old  unapproach- 
able majesty,  but  become  more  and  more  democratized  and 
even  vulgarized,  casting  aside  the  external  prestige  that 
remained  to  them,  and  thereby  destroying  the  very  thing  it 
was  their  function  to  maintain. 

It  is  just  the  same  with  the  army.  Military  officers  of 
the  highest  rank,  instead  of  encouraging  in  their  soldiers 
the  brutality  and  ferocity  necessary  for  their  work,  diffuse 
education  among  the  soldiers,  inculcate  humanity,  and  often 
even  themselves  share  the  socialistic  ideas  of  the  masses 
and  denounce  war.  In  the  last  plots  against  the  Russian 
Government  many  of  the  conspirators  were  in  the  army. 
And  the  number  of  the  disaffected  in  the  army  is  always 
increasing.  And  it  often  happens  (there  was  a case,  indeed, 
within  the  last  few  days)  that  when  called  upon  to  quell 
disturbances  they  refuse  to  fire  upon  the  people.  Military 
exploits  are  openly  reprobated  by  the  military  themselves, 
and  are  often  the  subject  of  jests  among  them. 

It  is  the  same  with  judges  and  public  prosecutors.  The 
judges,  whose  duty  it  is  to  judge  and  condemn  criminals, 
conduct  the  proceedings  so  as  to  whitewash  them  as  far  as 
possible.  So  that  the  Russian  Government,  to  procure  the 
condemnation  of  those  whom  they  want  to  punish,  never 
intrust  them  to  the  ordinary  tribunals,  but  have  them  tried 
before  a court  martial,  which  is  only  a parody  of  justice. 
The  prosecutors  themselves  often  refuse  to  proceed,  and 
even  when  they  do  proceed,  often  in  spite  of  the  law,  really 
defend  those  they  ought  to  be  accusing.  The  learned 
jurists  whose  business  it  is  to  justify  the  violence  of 
authority,  are  more  and  more  disposed  to  deny  the  right  of 
punishment  and  to  replace  it  by  theories  of  irresponsibility 
and  even  of  moral  insanity,  proposing  to  deal  with  those 
they  call  criminals  by  medical  treatment  only. 


270 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


Jailers  and  overseers  of  galleys  generally  become  the 
champions  of  those  whom  they  ought  to  torture.  Police 
officers  and  detectives  are  continually  assisting  the  escape 
of  those  they  ought  to  arrest.  The  clergy  preach  tolerance, 
and  even  sometimes  condemn  the  use  of  force,  and  the  more 
educated  among  them  try  in  their  sermons  to  avoid  the  very 
deception  which  is  the  basis  of  their  position  and  which  it 
is  their  duty  to  support.  Executioners  refuse  to  perform 
their  functions,  so  that  in  Russia  the  death  penalty  cannot 
be  carried  out  for  want  of  executioners.  And  in  spite  of 
all  the  advantages  bestowed  on  these  men,  who  are  selected 
from  convicts,  there  is  a constantly  diminishing  number  of 
volunteers  for  the  post.  Governors,  police  officials,  tax 
collectors  often  have  compassion  on  the  people  and  try  to 
find  pretexts  for  not  collecting  the  tax  from  them.  The 
rich  are  not  at  ease  in  spending  their  wealth  only  on  them- 
selves, and  lavish  it  on  works  of  public  utility.  Land- 
owners  build  schools  and  hospitals  on  their  property,  and 
some  even  give  up  the  ownership  of  their  land  and  transfer 
it  to  the  cultivators,  or  establish  communities  upon  it. 
Millovvners  and  manufacturers  build  hospitals,  schools, 
savings  banks,  asylums,  and  dwellings  for  their  work- 
people. Some  of  them  form  co-operative  associations  in 
which  they  have  shares  on  the  same  terms  as  the  others. 
Capitalists  expend  a part  of  their  capital  on  educational, 
artistic,  philanthropic,  and  other  public  institutions.  And 
many,  who  are  not  equal  to  parting  with  their  wealth  in 
their  lifetime,  leave  it  in  their  wills  to  public  institutions. 

All  these  phenomena  might  seem  to  be  mere  exceptions, 
except  that  they  can  all  be  referred  to  one  common  cause. 
Just  as  one  might  fancy  the  first  leaves  on  the  budding 
trees  in  April  were  exceptional  if  we  did  not  know  that  they 
all  have  a common  cause,  the  spring,  and  that  if  we  see  the 
branches  on  some  trees  shooting  and  turning  green,  it  is 
certain  that  it  will  soon  be  so  with  all. 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


271 


So  it  is  with  the  manifestation  of  the  Christian  standard 
of  opinion  on  force  and  all  that  is  based  on  force.  If  this 
standard  alread)'’  influences  some,  the  most  impressionable, 
and  impels  each  in  his  own  sphere  to  abandon  advantages 
based  on  the  use  of  force,  then  its  influence  will  extend 
further  and  further  till  it  transforms  the  whole  order  of 
men’s  actions  and  puts  it  into  accord  with  the  Christian  ideal 
which  is  already  a living  force  in  the  vanguard  of  humanity. 

And  if  there  are  now  rulers,  who  do  not  decide  on 
any  step  on  their  own  authority,  who  try  to  be  as  unlike 
monarchs,  and  as  like  plain  mortals  as  possible,  who  state 
their  readiness  to  give  up  their  prerogatives  and  become 
simply  the  first  citizens  of  a republic  ; if  there  are  already 
soldiers  who  realize  all  the  sin  and  harm  of  war,  and  are 
not  willing  to  fire  on  men  either  of  their  own  or  a foreign 
country  ; judges  and  prosecutors  who  do  not  like  to  try 
and  to  condemn  criminals  ; priests,  who  abjure  deception  ; 
tax-gatherers  who  try  to  perform  as  little  as  they  can  of 
their  duties,  and  rich  men  renouncing  their  wealth — then 
the  same  thing  will  inevitably  happen  to  other  rulers,  other 
soldiers,  other  judges,  priests,  tax-gatherers,  and  rich  men. 
And  when  there  are  no  longer  men  willing  to  fill  these 
offices,  these  offices  themselves  will  disappear  too. 

But  this  is  not  the  only  way  in  which  public  opinion  is 
leading  men  to  the  abolition  of  the  prevailing  order  and 
the  substitution  of  a new  order.  As  the  positions  based  on 
the  rule  of  force  become  less  attractive  and  fewer  men  are 
found  willing  to  fill  them,  the  more  will  their  uselessness 
be  apparent. 

Everywhere  throughout  the  Christian  world  the  same 
rulers,  and  the  same  governments,  the  same  armies,  the 
same  law  courts,  the  same  tax-gatherers,  the  same  priests, 
the  same  rich  men,  landowners,  manufacturers,  and  capital- 
ists, as  ever,  but  the  attitude  of  the  world  to  them,  and 
their  attitude  to  themselves  is  altogether  changed. 


2)2 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


The  same  sovereigns  have  still  the  same  audiences  and 
interviews,  hunts  and  banquets,  and  balls  and  uniforms  ; 
there  are  the  same  diplomats  and  the  same  deliberations 
on  alliances  and  wars  ; there  are  still  the  same  parliaments, 
with  the  same  debates  on  the  Eastern  question  and  Africa, 
on  treaties  and  violations  of  treaties,  and  Home  Rule  and 
the  eight-hour  day  ; and  one  set  of  ministers  replacing 
another  in  the  same  way,  and  the  same  speeches  and  the 
same  incidents.  But  for  men  who  observe  how  one  news- 
paper article  has  more  effect  on  the  position  of  affairs  than 
dozens  of  royal  audiences  or  parliamentary  sessions,  it 
becomes  more  and  more  evident  that  these  audiences  and 
interviews  and  debates  in  parliaments  do  not  direct  the 
course  of  affairs,  but  something  independent  of  all  that, 
which  cannot  be  concentrated  in  one  place. 

The  same  generals  and  officers  and  soldiers,  and  cannons 
and  fortresses,  and  reviews  and  maneuvers,  but  no  war 
breaks  out.  One  year,  ten,  twenty  years  pass  by.  And  it 
becomes  less  and  less  possible  to  rely  on  the  army  for  the 
pacification  of  riots,  and  more  and  more  evident,  conse- 
quently, that  generals,  and  officers,  and  soldiers  are  only 
figures  in  solemn  processions — objects  of  amusement  for 
governments — a sort  of  immense — and  far  too  expensive — 
corps  de  ballet. 

The  same  lawyers  and  judges,  and  the  same  assizes,  but 
it  becomes  more  and  more  evident  that  the  civil  courts 
decide  cases  on  the  most  diverse  grounds,  but  regardless 
of  justice,  and  that  criminal  trials  are  quite  senseless,  be- 
cause the  punishments  do  not  attain  the  objects  aimed  at 
by  the  judges  themselves.  These  institutions  therefore 
serve  no  other  purpose  than  to  provide  a means  of  liveli- 
hood for  men  who  are  not  capable  of  doing  anything  more 
useful. 

The  same  priests  and  archbishops  and  churches  and 
synods,  but  it  becomes  more  and  more  evident  that  they 


75  WITHIN  YOU." 


273 


have  long  ago  ceased  to  believe  in  what  they  preach,  and 
therefore  they  can  convince  no  one  of  the  necessity  of 
believing  what  they  don’t  believe  themselves. 

The  same  tax  collectors,  but  they  are  less  and  less  capa- 
ble of  taking  men’s  property  from  them  by  force,  and  it 
becomes  more  and  more  evident  that  people  can  collect  all 
that  is  necessary  by  voluntary  subscription  without  their 
aid. 

The  same  rich  men,  but  it  becomes  more  and  more  evi- 
dent that  they  can  only  be  of  use  by  ceasing  to  administer 
their  property  in  person  and  giving  up  to  society  the  whole 
or  at  least  a part  of  their  wealth. 

And  when  all  this  has  become  absolutely  evident  to 
everyone,  it  will  be  natural  for  men  to  ask  themselves  : 
“ But  why  should  we  keep  and  maintain  all  these  kings, 
emperors,  presidents,  and  members  of  all  sorts  of  senates 
and  ministries,  since  nothing  comes  of  all  their  debates  and 
audiences?  Wouldn’t  it  be  better,  as  some  humorist  sug- 
gested, to  make  a queen  of  india-rubber  ? ” 

And  what  good  to  us  are  these  armies  with  their  generals 
and  bands  and  horses  and  drums?  And  what  need  is 
there  of  them  when  there  is  no  war,  and  no  one  wants  to 
make  war  ? and  if  there  were  a war,  other  nations  would 
not  let  us  gain  any  advantage  from  it ; while  the  soldiers 
refuse  to  fire  on  their  fellow-countrymen. 

And  what  is  the  use  of  these  lawyers  and  judges  who 
don’t  decide  civil  cases  with  justice  and  recognize  them- 
selves the  uselessness  of  punishments  in  criminal  cases? 

And  what  is  the  use  of  tax  collectors  who  collect  the 
taxes  unwillingly,  when  it  is  easy  to  raise  all  that  is  wanted 
without  them  ? 

What  is  the  use  of  the  clergy,  who  don’t  believe  in  what 
they  preach  ? 

And  what  is  the  use  of  capital  in  the  hands  of  private 
persons,  when  it  can  only  be  of  use  as  the  property  of  all  ? 


2 74  “ the  kingdom  of  god 

And  when  once  people  have  asked  themselves  these 
questions  they  cannot  help  coming  to  some  decision  and 
ceasing  to  support  all  these  institutions  which  are  no 
longer  of  use. 

But  even  before  those  who  support  these  institutions 
decide  to  abolish  them,  the  men  who  occupy  these  posi- 
tions will  be  reduced  to  the  necessity  of  throwing  them  up. 

Public  opinion  more  and  more  condemns  the  use  of  force, 
and  therefore  men  are  less  and  less  willing  to  fill  positions 
which  rest  on  the  use  of  force,  and  if  they  do  occupy  them, 
are  less  and  less  able  to  make  use  of  force  in  them.  And 
hence  they  must  become  more  and  more  superfluous. 

I once  took  part  in  Moscow  in  a religious  meeting  which 
used  to  take  place  generally  in  the  week  after  Easter  near 
the  church  in  the  Ohotny  Row.  A little  knot  of  some 
twenty  men  were  collected  together  on  the  pavement, 
engaged  in  serious  religious  discussion.  At  the  same  time 
there  was  a kind  of  concert  going  on  in  the  buildings  of 
the  Court  Club  in  the  same  street,  and  a police  officer 
noticing  the  little  group  collected  near  the  church  sent  a 
mounted  policeman  to  disperse  it.  It  was  absolutely  un- 
necessary for  the  officer  to  disperse  it.  A group  of  twenty 
men  was  no  obstruction  to  anyone,  but  he  had  been  stand- 
ing there  the  whole  morning,  and  he  wanted  to  do  some- 
thing. The  policeman,  a young  fellow,  with  a resolute 
flourish  of  his  right  arm  and  a clink  of  his  saber,  came  up 
to  us  and  commanded  us  severely  : “ Move  on  ! what’s 
this  meeting  about  ?”  Everyone  looked  at  the  policeman, 
and  one  of  the  speakers,  a quiet  man  in  a peasant’s  dress, 
answered  with  a calm  and  gracious  air,  “ We  are  speaking 
of  serious  matters,  and  there  is  no  need  for  us  to  move  on  ; 
you  would  do  better,  young  man,  to  get  off  your  horse  and 
listen.  It  might  do  you  good”;  and  turning  round  he 
continued  his  discourse.  The  policeman  turned  his  horse 
and  went  off  without  a word. 


IS  WITHIN  YOU.” 


275 


That  is  just  what  should  be  done  in  all  cases  of  violence. 

The  officer  was  bored,  he  had  nothing  to  do.  He  had 
been  put,  poor  fellow,  in  a position  in  which  he  had  no 
choice  but  to  give  orders.  He  was  shut  off  from  all  human 
existence  ; he  could  do  nothing  but  superintend  and  give 
orders,  and  give  orders  and  superintend,  though  his  super- 
intendence and  his  orders  served  no  useful  purpose  what- 
ever. And  this  is  the  position  in  which  all  these  unlucky 
rulers,  ministers,  members  of  parliament,  governors, 
generals,  officers,  archbishops,  priests,  and  even  rich  men 
find  themselves  to  some  extent  already,  and  will  find  them- 
selves altogether  as  time  goes  on.  They  can  do  nothing 
but  give  orders,  and  they  give  orders  and  send  their  mes- 
sengers, as  the  officer  sent  the  policeman,  to  interfere  with 
people.  And  because  the  people  they  hinder  turn  to 
them  and  request  them  not  to  interfere,  they  fancy  they 
are  very  useful  indeed. 

But  the  time  will  come  and  is  com.ing  when  it  will  be 
perfectly  evident  to  everyone  that  they  are  not  of  any  use 
at  all,  and  only  a hindrance,  and  those  whom  they  interfere 
with  will  say  gently  and  quietly  to  them,  like  my  friend  in 
tbe  street  meeting,  “ Pray  don’t  interfere  with  us.”^  And 
all  the  messengers  and  those  who  send  them  too  will  be 
obliged  to  follow  this  good  advice,  that  is  to  say,  will  leave 
olf  galloping  about,  with  their  arms  akimbo,  interfering 
with  people,  and  getting  off  their  horses  and  removing  their 
spurs,  will  listen  to  what  is  being  said,  and  mixing  with 
others,  will  take  their  place  with  them  in  some  real  human 
work. 

The  time  will  come  and  is  inevitably  coming  when  all 
institutions  based  on  force  will  disappear  through  their 
uselessness,  stupidity,  and  even  inconvenience  becoming 
obvious  to  all. 

The  time  must  come  when  the  men  of  our  modern  world 
who  fill  offices  based  upon  violence  will  find  themselves  in 


276 


‘ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


the  position  of  the  emperor  in  Andersen’s  tale  of  “ The 
Emperor’s  New  Clothes,”  when  the  child  seeing  the 
emperor  undressed,  cried  in  all  simplicity,  “ Look,  he  is 
naked  ! ” And  then  all  the  rest,  who  had  seen  him  and 
said  nothing,  could  not  help  recognizing  it  too. 

The  story  is  that  there  was  once  an  emperor,  very  fond 
of  new  clothes.  And  to  him  came  two  tailors,  who  prom- 
ised to  make  him  some  extraordinary  clothes.  The 
emperor  engages  them  and  they  begin  to  sew  at  them,  but 
they  explain  that  the  clothes  have  the  extraordinary  prop- 
erty of  remaining  invisible  to  anyone  who  is  unfit  for  his 
position.  The  courtiers  come  to  look  at  the  tailors’  work 
and  see  nothing,  for  the  men  are  plying  their  needles  in 
empty  space.  But  remembering  the  extraordinary  property 
of  the  clothes,  they  all  declare  they  see  them  and  are  loud 
in  their  admiration.  The  emperor  does  the  same  himself. 
The  day  of  the  procession  comes  in  which  the  emperor  is 
to  go  out  in  his  new  clothes.  The  emperor  undresses  and 
puts  on  his  new  clothes,  that  is  to  say,  remains  naked,  and 
naked  he  walks  through  the  town.  But  remembering  the 
magic  property  of  the  clothes,  no  one  ventures  to  say  that 
he  has  nothing  on  till  a little  child  cries  out  : “ Look,  he  is 
naked  ! ” 

This  will  be  exactly  the  situation  of  all  who  continue 
through  inertia  to  fill  offices  which  have  long  become  use- 
less directly  someone  who  has  no  interest  in  concealing 
their  uselessness  exclaims  in  all  simplicity:  “But  these 
people  have  been  of  no  use  to  anyone  for  a long  time 
past ! ” 

The  condition  of  Christian  humanity  with  its  fortresses, 
cannons,  dynamite,  guns,  torpedoes,  prisons,  gallows, 
churches,  factories,  customs  offices,  and  palaces  is  really 
terrible.  But  still  cannons  and  guns  will  not  fire  them- 
selves, prisons  will  not  shut  men  up  of  themselves,  gallows 
will  not  hang  them,  churches  will  not  delude  them,  nor 


IS  WITHIN  YOU: 


277 


customs  offices  hinder  them,  and  palaces  and  factories  are 
not  built  nor  kept  up  of  themselves.  All  those  things  are  the 
work  of  men.  If  men  come  to  understand  that  they  ought 
not  to  do  these  things,  then  they  will  cease  to  be.  And 
already  they  are  beginning  to  understand  it.  Though  all  do 
not  understand  it  yet,  the  advanced  guard  understand  and 
the  rest  will  follow  them.  And  the  advanced  guard  cannot 
cease  to  understand  what  they  have  once  understood  ; and 
what  they  understand  the  rest  not  only  can  but  must 
inevitably  understand  hereafter. 

So  that  the  prophecy  that  the  time  will  come  when  men 
will  be  taught  of  God,  will  learn  war  no  more,  will  beat 
their  swords  into  plowshares  and  their  spears  into  reap- 
ing-hooks, which  means,  translating  it  into  our  language, 
the  fortresses,  prisons,  barracks,  palaces,  and  churches  will 
remain  empty,  and  all  the  gibbets  and  guns  and  cannons 
will  be  left  unused,  is  no  longer  a dream,  but  the  definite 
new  form  of  life  to  which  mankind  is  approaching  with 
ever-increasing  rapidity. 

But  when  will  it  be  ? 

Eighteen  hundred  years  ago  to  this  question  Christ 
answered  that  the  end  of  the  world  (that  is,  of  the  pagan 
organization  of  life)  shall  come  when  the  tribulation  of  men 
is  greater  than  it  has  ever  been,  and  when  the  Gospel  of 
the  kingdom  of  God,  that  is,  the  possibility  of  a new  organ- 
ization of  life,  shall  be  preached  in  the  world  unto  all 
nations.  (Matt.  xxiv.  3-28.)  But  of  that  day  and  hour 
knoweth  no  man  but  the  Father  only  (Matt.  xxiv.  3-6), 
said  Christ.  For  it  may  come  any  time,  in  such  an  hour  as 
ye  think  not. 

To  the  question  when  this  hour  cometh  Christ  answers 
that  we  cannot  know,  but  just  because  we  cannot  know 
when  that  hour  is  coming  we  ought  to  be  always  ready  to 
meet  it,  just  as  the  master  ought  to  watch  who  guards  his 
house  from  thieves,  as  the  virgins  ought  to  watch  with 


278 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


lamps  alight  for  the  bridegroom  ; and  further,  we  ought  to 
work  with  all  the  powers  given  us  to  bring  that  hour  to 
pass,  as  the  servants  ought  to  work  with  the  talents 
intrusted  to  them.  (Matt.  xxiv.  43,  and  xxvi.  13,  14-30.) 

And  there  could  be  no  answer  but  this  one.  Men  can- 
not know  when  the  day  and  the  hour  of  the  kingdom  of 
God  will  come,  because  its  coming  depends  on  themselves 
alone. 

The  answer  is  like  that  of  the  wise  man  who,  when  asked 
whether  it  was  far  to  the  town,  answered,  “ Walk  ! ” 

How  can  we  tell  whether  it  is  far  to  the  goal  which 
humanity  is  approaching,  when  we  do  not  know  how  men 
are  going  toward  it,  while  it  depends  on  them  whether  they 
go  or  do  not  go,  stand  still,  slacken  their  pace  or  hasten  it  ? 

All  we  can  know  is  what  we  who  make  up  mankind 
ought  to  do,  and  not  to  do,  to  bring  about  the  coming  of 
the  kingdom  of  God.  And  that  we  all  know.  And  we  need 
only  each  begin  to  do  what  we  ought  to  do,  we  need  only 
each  live  with  all  the  light  that  is  in  us,  to  bring  about  at 
once  the  promised  kingdom  of  God  to  which  every  man’s 
heart  is  yearning. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

CONCLUSION — REPENT  YE,  FOR  THE  KINGDOM  OF  HEAVEN 
IS  AT  HAND. 

I.  Chance  Meeting  with  a Train  Carrying  Soldiers  to  Restore  Order 
Among  the  Famishing  Peasants — Reason  of  the  Expedition — How  the 
Decisions  of  the  Higher  Authorities  are  Enforced  in  Cases  of  Insub- 
ordination on  Part  of  the  Peasants — What  Happened  at  Orel,  as  an 
Example  of  How  the  Rights  of  the  Propertied  Classes  are  Maintained 
by  Murder  and  Torture — All  the  Privileges  of  the  Wealthy  are  Based 
on  Similar  Acts  of  Violence. 

2.  The  Elements  that  Made  up  the  Force  Sent  to  Toula,  and  the  Con- 
duct of  the  Men  Composing  it — How  these  Men  Could  Carry  Out  such 
Acts — The  Explanation  is  Not  to  be  Found  in  Ignorance,  Conviction, 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


279 

Cruelty,  Heartlessness,  or  Want  of  Moral  Sense — They  do  these 
Things  Because  they  are  Necessary  to  Support  the  Existing  Order, 
which  they  Consider  it  Every  Man’s  Duty  to  Support — The  Basis  of 
this  Conviction  that  the  Existing  Order  is  Necessary  and  Inevitable — 
In  the  Upper  Classes  this  Conviction  is  Based  on  the  Advantages  of 
the  Existing  Order  for  Themselves — But  what  Forces  Men  of  the 
Lower  Classes  to  Believe  in  the  Immutability  of  the  Existing  Order, 
from  which  they  Derive  no  Advantage,  and  which  they  Aid  in  Main- 
taining, Facts  Contrary  to  their  Conscience? — This  is  the  Result  of  the 
Lower  Classes  being  Deluded  by  the  Upper,  Both  as  to  the  Inevi- 
tability of  the  Existing  Order  and  the  Lawfulness  of  the  Acts  of 
Violence  Needed  to  Maintain  it — Deception  in  General — Special  Form 
of  Deception  in  Regard  to  Military  Service — Conscription. 

3.  How  can  Men  Allow  that  Murder  is  Permissible  while  they  Preach 
Principles  of  Morality,  and  How  can  they  Allow  of  the  Existence  in 
their  Midst  of  a Military  Organization  of  Physical  Force  which  is  a 
Constant  Menace  to  Public  Security  ? — It  is  only  Allowed  by  the 
Upper  Classes,  who  Profit  by  this  Organization,  Because  their  Privi- 
leges are  Maintained  by  it — The  Upper  Classes  Allow  it,  and  the 
Lower  Classes  Carry  it  into  Effect  in  Spite  of  their  Consciousness  of 
the  Immorality  of  the  Deeds  of  Violence,  the  More  Readily  Because 
Through  the  Arrangements  of  the  Government  the  Moral  Responsi- 
bility for  such  Deeds  is  Divided  among  a Great  Number  of  Partici- 
pants in  it,  and  Everyone  Throws  the  Responsibility  on  Someone 
Else — Moreover,  the  Sense  of  Moral  Responsibility  is  Lost  through 
the  Delusion  of  Inequality,  and  the  Consequent  Intoxication  of  Power 
on  the  Part  of  Superiors,  and  Servility  on  the  Part  of  Inferiors — The 
Condition  of  these  Men,  Acting  against  the  Dictates  of  their  Con- 
science, is  Like  that  of  Hypnotized  Subjects  Acting  by  Suggestion — 
The  Difference  between  this  Obedience  to  Government  Suggestion, 
and  Obedience  to  Public  Opinion,  and  to  the  Guidance  of  Men  of  a 
Higher  Moral  Sense — The  Existing  Order  of  Society,  which  is  the 
Result  of  an  Extinct  Public  Opinion  and  is  Inconsistent  with  the  Al- 
ready Existing  Public  Opinion  of  the  Future,  is  only  Maintained  by  the 
Stupefaction  of  the  Conscience,  Produced  Spontaneously  by  Self-inter- 
est in  the  Upper  Classes  and  Through  Hypnotizing  in  the  Lower 
Classes — The  Conscience  or  the  Common  Sense  of  such  Men  may 
Awaken  ,and  there  are  Examples  of  its  Sudden  Awakening,  so  that  one 
can  Never  be  Sure  of  the  Deeds  of  Violence  they  are  Prepared  for — It 
Depends  Entirely  on  the  Point  which  the  Sense  of  the  Unlawfulness  of 
Acts  of  Violence  has  Reached,  and  this  Sense  may  Spontaneously 


28o 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


Awaken  in  Men,  or  may  be  Reawakened  by  the  Influence  of  Men  of 
more  Conscience. 

4.  Everything  Depends  on  the  Strength  of  the  Consciousness  of  Chris- 
tian Truths  in  Each  Individual  Man — The  Leading  Men  of  Modern 
Times,  however,  do  not  Think  it.Necessary  to  Preach  or  Practice  the 
Truths  of  Christianity,  but  Regard  the  Modification  of  the  External 
Conditions  of  Existence  within  the  Limit  Imposed  by  Governments  as 
Sufficient  to  Reform  the  Life  of  Humanity — On  this  Scientific  Theory 
of  Hypocrisy,  which  has  Replaced  the  Plypocrisy  of  Religion,  Men  of 
the  Wealthy  Classes  Base  their  Justification  of  their  Position — Through 
this  Hypocrisy  they  can  Enjoy  the  Exclusive  Privileges  of  their  Posi- 
tion by  Force  and  Fraud,  and  Still  Pretend  to  be  Christians  to  One 
Another  and  be  Easy  in  their  Minds — This  Hypocrisy  Allows  Men 
who  Preach  Christianity  to  Take  Part  in  Institutions  Based  on  Vio- 
lence— No  External  Reformation  of  Life  will  Render  it  Less  Miser- 
able— Its  Misery  the  Result  of  Disunion  Caused  by  P'ollowing  Lies,  not 
the  Truth — Union  only  Possible  in  Truth — Hypocrisy  Hinders  this 
Union,  since  Hypocrites  Conceal  from  themselves  and  Others  the 
Truth  they  Know — Hypocrisy  Turns  all  Reforms  of  Life  to  Evil — 
Hypocrisy  Distorts  the  Idea  of  Good  and  Evil,  and  so  Stands  in  the 
Way  of  the  Progress  of  Men  toward  Perfection — Undisguised  Crimi- 
nals and  Malefactors  do  Less  Plarm  than  those  who  Live  by  Legalized 
Violence,  Disguised  by  Hypocrisy — All  Men  Feel  the  Iniquity  of  our 
Life,  and  would  Long  Ago  have  Transformed  it  if  it  had  not  been  Dis- 
simulated by  Hypocrisy — But  Seem  to  have  Reached  the  Extreme 
Limits  of  Hypocrisy,  and  we  Need  only  Make  an  Effort  of  Conscience 
to  Awaken  as  from  a Nightmare  to  a Different  Reality. 

5.  Can  Man  Make  this  Effort  ? — According  to  the  Hypocritical 
Theory  of  the  Day,  Man  is  not  Free  to  Transform  his  Life — Man  is 
not  Free  in  his  Actions,  but  he  is  Free  to  Admit  or  to  Deny  the  Truth 
he  Knows — When  Truth  is  Once  Admitted,  it  Becomes  the  Basis  of 
Action — Man’s  Threefold  Relation  to  Truth — The  Reason  of  the  Ap- 
parent Insolubility  of  the  Problem  of  Free  Will — Man’s  Freedom  Con- 
sists in  the  Recognition  of  the  Truth  Revealed  to  him.  There  is  no 
Other  Freedom — Recognition  of  Truth  Gives  Freedom,  and  Shows  the 
Path  Along  which.  Willingly  or  Unwillingly  by  Mankind,  Man  Must 
Advance — The  Recognition  of  Truth  and  Real  Freedom  Enables  Man 
to  Share  in  the  Work  of  God,  not  as  the  Slave,  but  as  the  Creator  of 
Life — Men  Need  only  Make  the  Effort  to  Renounce  all  Thought  of 
Bettering  the  External  Conditions  of  Life  and  Bend  all  their  Efforts  to 
Recognizing  and  Preaching  the  Truth  they  Know,  to  put  an  End  to  the 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


281 


Existing  Miserable  State  of  Things,  and  to  Enter  upon  the  Kingdom 
of  God  so  far  as  it  is  yet  Accessible  to  Man — All  that  is  Needed  is  to 
Make  an  End  of  Lying  and  Hypocrisy — But  then  what  Awaits  us  in 
the  Future  ? — What  will  Happen  to  Humanity  if  Men  Follow  the  Dic- 
tates of  their  Conscience,  and  how  can  Life  go  on  with  the  Conditions 
of  Civilized  Life  to  which  we  are  Accustomed  ? — All  Uneasiness  on 
these  Points  may  be  Removed  by  the  Reflection  that  Nothing  True  and 
Good  can  be  Destroyed  by  the  Realization  of  Truth,  but  will  only  be 
Freed  from  the  Alloy  of  Falsehood. 

6.  Our  Life  has  Reached  the  Extreme  Limit  of  Misery  and  Cannot  be 
Improved  by  any  Systems  of  Organization — All  our  Life  and  all  our 
Institutions  are  Quite  Meaningless — Are  we  Doing  what  God  Wills  of 
us  by  Preserving  our  Privileges  and  Duties  to  Government? — We  are 
put  in  this  Position  not  Because  the  World  is  so  Made  and  it  is  Inevi- 
table, but  Because  we  Wish  it  to  be  so.  Because  it  is  to  the  Advantage  of 
Some  of  us — Our  Conscience  is  in  Opposition  to  our  Position  and  all 
our  Conduct,  and  the  Way  Out  of  the  Contradiction  is  to  be  Found  in 
the  Recognition  of  the  Christian  Truth  : Do  Not  unto  Others  what 
you  Would  Not  they  should  Do  unto  You — As  our  Duties  to  Self 
Must  be  Subordinated  to  our  Duties  to  Others,  so  Must  our  Duties  to 
Others  be  Subordinated  to  our  Duties  to  God — TheOnly  Way  Outof 
our  Position  Lies,  if  not  in  Renouncing  our  Position  and  our  Privileges, 
at  Least  in  Recognizing  our  Sin  and  not  Justifying  it  nor  Disguising  it — 
The  Only  Object  of  Life  is  to  Learn  the  Truth  and  to  Act  on  it — Ac- 
ceptance of  the  Position  and  of  State  Action  Deprives  Life  of  all  Ob- 
ject— It  is  God’s  Will  that  we  should  Serve  Him  in  our  Life,  that  is, 
that  w'e  should  Bring  About  the  Greatest  Unity  of  all  that  has  Life,  a 
Unity  only  Possible  in  Truth. 

I WAS  finishing  this  book,  which  I had  been  working  at 
for  two  years,  when  I happened  on  the  9th  of  September 
to  be  traveling  by  rail  through  the  governments  of  Toula 
and  Riazan,  where  the  peasants  were  starving  last  year 
and  where  the  famine  is  even  more  severe  now.  At  one  of 
the  railway  stations  my  train  passed  an  extra  train  which 
was  taking  a troop  of  soldiers  under  the  conduct  of  the 
governor  of  the  province,  together  with  muskets,  cartridges, 
and  rods,  to  flog  and  murder  these  same  famishing  peasants. 
The  punishment  of  flogging  by  way  of  carrying  the 


282 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


decrees  of  the  authorities  into  effect  has  been  more  and 
more  frequently  adopted  of  late  in  Russia,  in  spite  of  the 
fact  that  corporal  punishment  was  abolished  by  law  thirty 
years  ago. 

I had  heard  of  this,  I had  even  read  in  the  newspapers 
of  the  fearful  floggings  which  had  been  inflicted  in  Tcher- 
nigov,  Tambov,  Saratov,  Astrakhan,  and  Orel,  and  of  those 
of  which  the  governor  of  Nijni-Novgorod,  General  Bara- 
nov, had  boasted.  But  I had  never  before  happened  to 
see  men  in  the  process  of  carrying  out  these  punishments. 

And  here  I saw  the  spectacle  of  good  Russians  full  of 
the  Christian  spirit  traveling  with  guns  and  rods  to  torture 
and  kill  their  starving  brethren.  The  reason  for  their 
expedition  was  as  follows  : 

On  one  of  the  estates  of  a rich  landowner  the  peasants 
had  common  rights  on  the  forest,  and  having  always 
enjoyed  these  rights,  regarded  the  forest  as  their  own,  or 
at  least  as  theirs  in  common  with  the  owner.  The  land- 
owner  wished  to  keep  the  forest  entirely  to  himself  and 
began  to  fell  the  trees.  The  peasants  lodged  a complaint. 
The  judges  in  the  first  instance  gave  an  unjust  decision  (I 
say  unjust  on  the  authority  of  the  lawyer  and  governor, 
who  ought  to  understand  the  matter),  and  decided  the  case 
in  favor  of  the  landowner.  All  the  later  decisions,  even 
that  of  the  senate,  though  they  could  see  that  the  matter 
had  been  unjustly  decided,  confirmed  the  judgment  and 
adjudged  the  forest  to  the  landowner.  He  began  to  cut 
down  the  trees,  but  the  peasants,  unable  to  believe  that 
such  obvious  injustice  could  be  done  them  by  the  higher 
authorities,  did  not  submit  to  the  decision  and  drove  away 
the  men  sent  to  cut  down  the  trees,  declaring  that  the 
forest  belonged  to  them  and  they  would  go  to  the  Tzar 
before  they  would  let  them  cut  it  down. 

The  matter  was  referred  to  Petersburg,  and  the  order 
was  transmitted  to  the  governor  to  carry  the  decision  of 


/s  WITHIN  your 


283 


the  court  into  effect.  The  governor  asked  for  a troop  of 
soldiers.  And  here  were  the  soldiers  with  bayonets  and 
cartridges,  and  moreover,  a supply  of  rods,  expressly  pre- 
pared for  the  purpose  and  heaped  up  in  one  of  the  trucks, 
going  to  carry  the  decision  of  the  higher  authorities  into 
effect. 

The  decisions  of  the  higher  authorities  are  carried  into 
effect  by  means  of  murder  or  torture,  or  threats  of  one  or 
the  other,  according  to  whether  they  offer  resistance  or  not. 

In  the  first  case  if  the  peasants  offer  resistance  the  prac- 
tice is  in  Russia,  and  it  is  the  same  everywhere  where  a 
state  organization  and  private  property  exist,  as  follows  : 

The  governor  delivers  an  address  in  which  he  demands 
submission.  The  excited  crowd,  generally  deluded  by 
their  leaders,  don’t  understand  a word  of  what  the  repre- 
sentative of  authority  is  saying  in  the  pompous  official 
language,  and  their  excitement  continues.  Then  the 
governor  announces  that  if  they  do  not  submit  and  dis- 
perse, he  will  be  obliged  to  have  recourse  to  force.  If  the 
crowd  does  not  disperse  even  on  this,  the  governor  gives  the 
order  to  fire  over  the  heads  of  the  crowd.  If  the  crowd  does 
not  even  then  disperse,  the  governor  gives  the  order  to  fire 
straight  into  the  crowd  ; the  soldiers  fire  and  the  killed  and 
wounded  fall  about  the  street.  Then  the  crowd  usually  runs 
away  in  all  directions,  and  the  troops  at  the  governor’s  com- 
mand take  those  who  are  supposed  to  be  the  ringleaders 
and  lead  them  off  under  escort.  Then  they  pick  up  the 
dying,  the  wounded,  and  the  dead,  covered  with  blood,  some- 
times women  and  children  among  them.  The  dead  they 
bury  and  the  wounded  they  carry  to  the  hospital.  Those 
whom  they  regard  as  the  ringleaders  they  take  to  the  town 
hall  and  have  them  tried  by  a special  court-martial.  And  if 
they  have  had  recourse  to  violence  on  their  side,  they  are 
condemned  to  be  hanged.  And  then  the  gallows  is  erected. 
And  they  solemnly  strangle  a few  defenseless  creatures.' 


284 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


This  is  what  has  often  been  done  in  Russia,  and  is  and 
must  always  be  done  where  the  social  order  is  based  on 
force. 

But  in  the  second  case,  when  the  peasants  do  submit, 
something  quite  special,  peculiar  to  Russia,  takes  place. 
The  governor  arrives  on  the  scene  of  action  and  delivers 
an  harangue  to  the  people,  reproaching  them  for  their 
insubordination,  and  either  stations  troops  in  the  houses  of 
the  villages,  where  sometimes  for  a whole  month  the  sol- 
diers drain  the  resources  of  the  peasants,  or  contenting 
him.self  with  threats,  he  mercifully  takes  leave  of  the  peo- 
ple, or  what  is  the  most  frequent  course,  he  announces 
that  the  ringleaders  must  be  punished,  and  quite  arbitrarily 
without  any  trial  selects  a certain  number  of  men,  regarded 
as  ringleaders,  and  commands  them  to  be  flogged  in  his 
presence. 

In  order  to  give  an  idea  of  how  such  things  are  done  I 
will  describe  a proceeding  of  the  kind  which  took  place  in 
Orel,  and  received  the  full  approval  of  the  highest  author- 
ities. 

This  is  what  took  place  in  Orel.  Just  as  here  in  the 
Toula  province,  a landlord  wanted  to  appropriate  the 
property  of  the  peasants  and  just  in  the  same  way  the 
peasants  opposed  it.  The  matter  in  dispute  was  a fall  of 
water,  which  irrigated  the  peasants’  fields,  and  which  the 
landowner  wanted  to  cut  off  and  divert  to  turn  his  mill. 
The  peasants  rebelled  against  this  being  done.  The  land- 
owner  laid  a complaint  before  the  district  commander,  who 
illegally  (as  was  recognized  later  even  by  a legal  decision) 
decided  the  matter  in  favor  of  the  landowner,  and  allowed 
him  to  divert  the  water  course.  The  landowner  sent  work- 
men to  dig  the  conduit  by  which  the  water  was  to  be  let  off 
to  turn  the  mill.  The  peasants  were  indignant  at  this 
unjust  decision,  and  sent  their  women  to  prevent  the  land- 
owner’s men  from  digging  this  conduit.  The  women  went 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


285 

to  the  dykes,  overturned  the  carts,  and  drove  away  the  men. 
The  landowner  made  a complaint  against  the  women  for 
thus  taking  the  law  into  their  own  hands.  The  district 
commander  made  out  an  order  that  from  every  house 
throughout  the  vilage  one  woman  was  to  be  taken  and  put 
in  prison.  The  order  was  not  easily  executed.  For  in 
every  household  there  were  several  women,  and  it  was 
impossible  to  know  which  one  was  to  be  arrested.  Conse- 
quently the  police  did  not  carry  out  the  order.  The  land- 
owner  complained  to  the  governor  of  the  neglect  on  the 
part  of  the  police,  and  the  latter,  without  examining  into 
the  affair,  gave  the  chief  official  of  the  police  strict  orders 
to  carry  out  the  instructions  of  the  district  commander 
without  delay.  The  police  official,  in  obedience  to  his 
superior,  went  to  the  village  and  with  the  insolence  peculiar 
to  Russian  officials  ordered  his  policemen  to  take  one 
woman  out  of  each  house.  But  since  there  were  more 
than  one  woman  in  each  house,  and  there  was  no  knowing 
which  one  was  sentenced  to  imprisonment,  disputes  and 
opposition  arose.  In  spite  of  these  disputes  and  opposition, 
however,  the  officer  of  police  gave  orders  that  some  woman, 
whichever  came  first,  should  be  taken  from  each  household 
and  led  away  to  prison.  The  peasants  began  to  defend 
their  wives  and  mothers,  would  not  let  them  go,  and  beat 
the  police  and  their  officer.  This  was  a fresh  and  terrible 
crime  : resistance  was  offered  to  the  authorities.  A report 
of  this  new  offense  was  sent  to  the  town.  And  so  this  gov- 
ernor— precisely  as  the  governor  of  Toula  was  doing  on 
that  day — with  a battalion  of  soldiers  with  guns  and  rods, 
hastily  brought  together  by  means  of  telegraphs  and  tele- 
phones and  railways,  proceeded  by  a special  train  to  the 
scene  of  action,  with  a learned  doctor  whose  duty  it  was 
to  insure  the  flogging  being  of  an  hygienic  character. 
Herzen’s  prophecy  of  the  modern  Ghenghis  Khan  with  his 
telegrams  is  completely  realized  by  this  governor. 


286 


THE  KlNGDOiM  OF  GOD 


Before  the  town  hall  of  the  district  were  the  soldiery,  a 
battalion  of  police  with  their  revolvers  slung  round  them 
with  red  cords,  the  persons  of  most  importance  among  the 
peasants,  and  the  culprits.  A crowd  of  one  thousand  or 
more  people  were  standing  round.  The  governor,  on  arriv- 
ing, stepped  out  of  his  carriage,  delivered  a prepared 
harangue,  and  asked  for  the  culprits  and  a bench.  The 
latter  demand  was  at  first  not  understood.  But  a police 
constable  whom  the  governor  always  took  about  with  him, 
and  who  undertook  to  organize  such  executions — by  no 
means  exceptional  in  that  province — explained  that  what 
was  meant  was  a bench  for  flogging.  A bench  was  brought 
as  well  as  the  rods,  and  then  the  executioners  were  sum- 
moned (the  latter  had  been  selected  beforehand  from  some 
horsestealers  of  the  same  village,  as  the  soldiers  refused 
the  office).  When  everything  was  ready,  the  governor 
ordered  the  first  of  the  twelve  culprits  pointed  out  by  the 
landowner  as  the  most  guilty  to  come  forward.  The  first 
to  come  forward  was  the  head  of  a family,  a man  of  forty 
who  had  always  stood  up  manfully  for  the  rights  of  his 
class,  and  therefore  was  held  in  the  greatest  esteem  by  all 
the  villagers.  He  was  led  to  the  bench  and  stripped,  and 
then  ordered  to  lie  down. 

The  peasant  attempted  to  supplicate  for  mercy,  but 
seeing  it  was  useless,  he  crossed  himself  and  lay  down. 
Two  police  constables  hastened  to  hold  him  down.  The 
learned  doctor  stood  by,  in  readiness  to  give  his  aid  and 
his  medical  science  when  they  should  be  needed.  The 
convicts  spit  into  their  hands,  brandished  the  rods,  and 
began  to  flog.  It  seemed,  however,  that  the  bench  was  too 
narrow,  and  it  was  difficult  to  keep  the  victim  writhing  in 
torture  upon  it.  Then  the  governor  ordered  them  to  bring 
another  bench  and  to  put  a plank  across  them.  Soldiers, 
with  their  hands  raised  to  their  caps,  and  respectful  mur- 
murs of  “ Yes,  your  Excellency,”  hasten  obediently  to  carry 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


287 


out  this  order.  Meanwhile  the  tortured  man,  half  naked, 
pale  and  scowling,  stood  waiting,  his  eyes  fixed  on  the 
ground  and  his  teeth  chattering.  When  another  bench  had 
been  brought  they  again  made  him  lie  down,  and  the  con- 
victed thieves  again  began  to  flog  him. 

The  victim’s  back  and  thighs  and  legs,  and  even  his 
sides,  became  more  and  more  covered  with  scars  and  wheals, 
and  at  every  blow  there  came  the  sound  of  the  deep  groans 
which  he  could  no  longer  restrain.  In  the  crowd  standing 
round  were  heard  the  sobs  of  wives,  mothers,  children,  the 
families  of  the  tortured  man  and  of  all  the  others  picked 
out  for  punishment. 

The  miserable  governor,  intoxicated  with  power,  was 
counting  the  strokes  on  his  fingers,  and  never  left  off 
smoking  cigarettes,  while  several  officious  persons  hastened 
on  every  opportunity  to  offer  him  a burning  match  to  light 
them.  When  more  than  fifty  strokes  had  been  given,  the 
peasant  ceased  to  shriek  and  writhe,  and  the  doctor,  who 
had  been  educated  in  a government  institution  to  serve 
his  sovereign  and  his  country  with  his  scientific  attainments, 
went  up  to  the  victim,  felt  his  pulse,  listened  to  his  heart, 
and  announced  to  the  representative  of  authority  that  the 
man  undergoing  punishment  had  lost  consciousness,  and 
that,  in  accordance  with  the  conclusions  of  science,  to  con- 
tinue the  punishment  would  endanger  the  victim’s  life.  But 
the  miserable  governor,  now  completely  intoxicated  by  the 
sight  of  blood,  gave  orders  that  the  punishment  should  go 
on,  and  the  flogging  was  continued  up  to  seventy  strokes, 
the  number  which  the  governor  had  for  some  reason  fixed 
upon  as  necessary.  When  the  seventieth  stroke  had  been 
reached,  the  governor  said  “ Enough  ! Next  one  ! ” And 
the  mutilated  victim,  his  back  covered  with  blood,  was 
lifted  up  and  carried  away  unconscious,  and  another  was 
led  up.  The  sobs  and  groans  of  the  crowd  grew  louder. 
But  the  representative  of  the  state  continued  the  torture. 


288 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


Thus  they  flogged  each  of  them  up  to  the  twelfth,  and 
each  of  them  received  seventy  strokes.  They  all  implored 
mercy,  shrieked  and  groaned.  The  sobs  and  cries  of  the 
crowd  of  women  grew  louder  and  more  heart-rending,  and 
the  men’s  faces  grew  darker  and  darker.  But  they  were 
surrounded  by  troops,  and  the  torture  did  not  cease  till  it 
had  reached  the  limit  which  had  been  fixed  by  the  caprice 
of  the  miserable  half-drunken  and  insane  creature  they 
called  the  governor. 

The  officials,  and  officers,  and  soldiers  not  only  assisted 
in  it,  but  were  even  partly  responsible  for  the  affair,  since 
by  their  presence  they  prevented  any  interference  on  the 
part  of  the  crowd. 

When  I inquired  of  one  of  the  governors  why  they  made 
use  of  this  kind  of  torture  when  people  had  already  sub- 
mitted and  soldiers  were  stationed  in  the  village,  he  replied 
with  the  important  air  of  a man  who  thoroughly  under- 
stands all  the  subtleties  of  statecraft,  that  if  the  peasants 
were  not  thoroughly  subdued  by  flogging,  they  would  begin 
offering  opposition  to  the  decisions  of  authorities  again. 
When  some  of  them  had  been  thoroughly  tortured,  the 
authority  of  the  state  would  be  secured  forever  among 
them. 

And  so  that  was  why  the  Governor  of  Toula  was  going 
in  his  turn  with  his  subordinate  officials,  officers,  and 
soldiers  to  carry  out  a similar  measure.  By  precisely  the 
same  means,  i.  e.,  by  murder  and  torture,  obedience  to  the 
decision  of  the  higher  authorities  was  to  be  secured.  And 
this  decision  was  to  enable  a young  landowner,  who  had  an 
income  of  one  hundred  thousand,  to  gain  three  thousand 
rubles  more  by  stealing  a forest  from  a whole  community 
of  cold  and  famished  peasants,  to  spend  it,  in  two  or  three 
weeks  in  the  saloons  of  Moscow,  Petei'sburg,  or  Paris. 
That  was  what  those  people  whom  I met  were  going  to  do. 

After  my  thoughts  had  for  two  years  been  turned  in  the 


/S  WITHIN  YOU." 


289 


same  direction,  fate  seemed  expressly  to  have  brought  me 
face  to  face  for  the  first  time  in  my  life  with  a fact  which 
showed  me  absolutely  unmistakably  in  practice  what  had 
long  been  clear  to  me  in  theory,  that  the  organization  of 
our  society  rests,  not  as  people  interested  in  maintaining 
the  present  order  of  things  like  to  imagine,  on  certain 
principles  of  jurisprudence,  but  on  simple  brute  force,  on 
the  murder  and  torture  of  men. 

People  who  own  great  estates  or  fortunes,  or  who  receive 
great  revenues  drawn  from  the  class  who  are  in  want  even 
of  necessities,  the  working  class,  as  well  as  all  those  who 
like  merchants,  doctors,  artists,  clerks,  learned  professors, 
coachmen,  cooks,  writers,  valets,  and  barristers,  make  their 
living  about  these  rich  people,  like  to  believe  that  the 
privileges  they  enjoy  are  not  the  result  of  force,  but  of 
absolutely  free  and  just  interchange  of  services,  and  that 
their  advantages,  far  from  being  gained  by  such  punish- 
ments and  murders  as  took  place  in  Orel  and  several  parts 
of  Russia  this  year,  and  are  always  taking  place  all  over 
Europe  and  America,  have  no  kind  of  connection  with 
these  acts  of  violence.  They  like  to  believe  that  their 
privileges  exist  apart  and  are  the  result  of  free  contract 
among  people  ; and  that  the  violent  cruelties  perpetrated 
on  the  people  also  exist  apart  and  are  the  result  of  some 
general  judicial,  political,  or  economical  laws.  They  try 
not  to  see  that  they  all  enjoy  their  privileges  as  a result  of 
the  same  fact  which  forces  the  peasants  who  have  tended 
the  forest,  and  who  are  in  the  direct  need  of  it  for  fuel,  to 
give  it  up  to  a rich  landowner  who  has  taken  no  part  in 
caring  for  its  growth  and  has  no  need  of  it  whatever — the 
fact,  that  is,  that  if  they  don’t  give  it  up  they  will  be  flogged 
or  killed. 

And  yet  if  it  is  clear  that  it  was  only  by  means  of  menaces, 
blows,  or  murder,  that  the  mill  in  Orel  was  enabled  to  yield 
a larger  income,  or  that  the  forest  which  the  peasants  had 


290 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


planted  became  the  property  of  a landowner,  it  should  be 
equally  clear  that  all  the  other  exclusive  rights  enjoyed  by 
the  rich,  by  robbing  the  poor  of  their  necessities,  rest  on 
the  same  basis  of  violence.  If  the  peasants,  who  need 
land  to  maintain  their  families,  may  not  cultivate  the  land 
about  their  houses,  but  one  man,  a Russian,  English,  Aus- 
trian, or  any  other  great  landowner,  possesses  land  enough 
to  maintain  a thousand  families,  though  he  does  not  culti- 
vate it  himself,  and  if  a merchar^t  profiting  by  the  misery 
of  the  cultivators,  taking  corn  from  them  at  a third  of  its 
value,  can  keep  this  corn  in  his  granaries  with  perfect 
security  while  men  are  starving  all  around  him,  and  sell  it 
again  for  three  times  its  value  to  the  very  cultivators  he 
bought  it  from,  it  is  evident  that  all  this  too  comes  from 
the  same  cause.  And  if  one  man  may  not  buy  of  another 
a commodity  from  the  other  side  of  a certain  fixed  line, 
called  the  frontier,  without  paying  certain  duties  on  it  to 
men  who  have  taken  no  part  whatever  in  its  production — 
and  if  men  are  driven  to  sell  their  last  cow  to  pay  taxes 
which  the  government  distributes  among  its  functionaries, 
and  spends  on  maintaining  soldiers  to  murder  these  very 
taxpayers — it  would  appear  self-evident  that  all  this  does 
not  come  about  as  the  result  of  any  abstract  laws,  but  is 
based  on  just  what  was  done  in  Orel,  and  which  may  be 
done  in  Toula,  and  is  done  periodically  in  one  form  or 
another  throughout  the  whole  world  wherever  there  is  a 
government,  and  where  there  are  rich  and  poor. 

Simply  because  torture  and  murder  are  not  employed  in 
every  instance  of  oppression  by  force,  those  who  enjoy  the 
exclusive  privileges  of  the  ruling  classes  persuade  themselves 
and  others  that  their  privileges  are  not  based  on  torture 
and  murder,  but  on  some  mysterious  general  causes,  abstract 
laws,  and  so  on.  Yet  one  would  think  it  was  perfectly  clear 
that  if  men,  who  consider  it  unjust  (and  all  the  working 
classes  do  consider  it  so  nowadays),  still  pay  the  principal 


IS  WITHIN'  YOU." 


291 


part  of  the  produce  of  their  labor  away  to  the  capitalist 
and  the  landowner,  and  pay  taxes,  though  they  know  to 
what  a bad  use  these  taxes  are  put,  they  do  so  not  from 
recognition  of  abstract  laws  of  which  they  have  never  heard, 
but  only  because  they  know  they  will  be  beaten  and  killed 
if  they  don’t  do  so. 

And  if  there  is  no  need  to  imprison,  beat,  and  kill  men 
every  time  the  landlord  collects  his  rents,  every  time  those 
who  are  in  want  of  bread  have  to  pay  a swindling  merchant 
three  times  its  value,  every  time  the  factory  hand  has  to  be 
content  with  a wage  less  than  half  of  the  profit  made  by 
the  employer,  and  every  time  a poor  man  pays  his  last 
ruble  in  taxes,  it  is  because  so  many  men  have  been  beaten 
and  killed  for  trying  to  resist  these  demands,  that  the  les- 
son has  now  been  learnt  very  thoroughly. 

Just  as  a trained  tiger,  who  does  not  eat  meat  put  under 
his  nose,  and  jumps  over  a stick  at  the  word  of  command, 
does  not  act  thus  because  he  likes  it,  but  because  he  re- 
members the  red-hot  irons  or  the  fast  with  which  he  was 
punished  every  time  he  did  not  obey  ; so  men  submitting 
to  what  is  disadvantageous  or  even  ruinous  to  them,  and 
considered  by  them  as  unjust,  act  thus  because  they  remem- 
ber what  they  suffered  for  resisting  it. 

As  for  those  who  profit  by  the  privileges  gained  by 
previous  acts  of  violence,  they  often  forget  and  like  to  for- 
get how  these  privileges  were  obtained.  But  one  need 
only  recall  the  facts  of  history,  not  the  history  of  the  ex- 
ploits of  different  dynasties  of  rulers,  but  real  history,  the 
history  of  the  oppression  of  the  majority  by  a small  number 
of  men,  to  see  that  all  the  advantages  the  rich  have  over 
the  poor  are  based  on  nothing  but  flogging,  imprisonment, 
and  murder. 

One  need  but  reflect  on  the  unceasing,  persistent  strug- 
gle of  all  to  better  their  material  position,  which  is  the 
guiding  motive  of  men  of  the  present  day,  to  be  convinced 


292 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


that  the  advantages  of  the  rich  over  the  poor  could  never 
and  can  never  be  maintained  by  anything  but  force. 

There  may  be  cases  of  oppression,  of  violence,  and  of 
punishments,  though  they  are  raicg^the  aim  of  which  is  not 
to  secure  the  privileges  of  the  propertied  classes.  But  one 
may  confidently  assert  that  in  any  society  where,  for  every 
man  living  in  ease,  there  are  ten  exhausted  by  labor, 
envious,  covetous,  and  often  suffering  with  their  families 
from  direct  privation,  all  the  privileges  of  the  rich,  all  their 
luxuries  and  superfluities,  are  obtained  and  maintained 
only  by  tortures,  imprisonment,  and  murder. 

The  train  I met  on  the  9th  of  September  going  with 
soldiers,  guns,  cartridges,  and  rods,  to  confirm  the  rich 
landowner  in  the  possession  of  a small  forest  which  he 
had  taken  from  the  starving  peasants,  which  they  were  in 
the  direst  need  of,  and  he  was  in  no  need  of  at  all,  was  a 
striking  proof  of  how  men  are  capable  of  doing  deeds 
directly  opposed  to  their  principles  and  their  conscience 
without  perceiving  it. 

The  special  train  consisted  of  one  first-class  carriage  for 
the  governor,  the  officials,  and  officers,  and  several  luggage 
vans  crammed  full  of  soldiers.  The  latter,  smart  young 
fellows  in  their  clean  new  uniforms,  were  standing  about 
in  groups  or  sitting  swinging  their  legs  in  the  wide  open 
doorways  of  the  luggage  vans.  Some  were  smoking, 
nudging  each  other,  joking,  grinning,  and  laughing,  others 
were  munching  sunflower  seeds  and  spitting  out  the  husks 
with  an  air  of  dignity.  Some  of  them  ran  along  the  plat- 
form to  drink  some  water  from  a tub  there,  and  when  they 
met  the  officers  they  slackened  their  pace,  made  their  stupid 
gesture  of  salutation,  raising  their  hands  to  their  heads  with 
serious  faces  as  though  they  were  doing  something  of  the 
greatest  importance.  They  kept  their  eyes  on  them  till 
they  had  passed  by  them,  and  then  set  off  running  still 
more  merrily,  stamping  their  heels  on  the  platform,  laugh- 


IS  WITH IX  YOU." 


293 


ing  and  chattering  after  the  manner  of  healthy,  good-natured 
young  fellows,  traveling  in  lively  company. 

They  were  going  to  assist  at  the  murder  of  their  fathers 
or  grandfathers  just  as  if  they  were  going  on  a party  of 
pleasure,  or  at  any  rate  on  some  quite  ordinary  busi- 
ness. 

The  same  impression  was  produced  by  the  well-dressed 
functionaries  and  officers  who  were  scattered  about  the 
platform  and  in  the  first-class  carriage.  At  a table  covered 
with  bottles  was  sitting  the  governor,  who  was  responsible 
for  the  whole  expedition,  dressed  in  his  half-military  uni- 
form and  eating  something  while  he  chatted  tranquilly 
about  the  weather  with  some  acquaintances  he  had  met,  as 
though  the  business  he  was  upon  was  of  so  simple  and  ordi- 
nary a character  that  it  could  not  disturb  his  serenity  and 
his  interest  in  the  change  of  weather. 

At  a little  distance  from  the  table  sat  the  general  of  the 
police.  He  was  not  taking  any  refreshment,  and  had  an 
impenetrable  bored  expression,  as  though  he  were  weary  of 
the  formalities  to  be  gone  through.  On  all  sides  officers 
were  bustling  noisily  about  in  their  red  uniforms  trimmed 
with  gold  ; one  sat  at  a table  finishing  his  bottle  of  beer, 
another  stood  at  the  buffet  eating  a cake,  and  brushing  the 
crumbs  off  his  uniform,  threw  down  his  money  with  a self- 
confident  air  ; another  was  sauntering  before  the  carriages 
of  our  train,  staring  at  the  faces  of  the  women. 

All  these  men  who  were  going  to  murder  or  to  torture 
the  famishing  and  defenseless  creatures  who  provide  them 
their  sustenance  had  the  air  of  men  who  knew  very  well 
that  they  were  doing  their  duty,  and  some  were  even  proud, 
were  “glorying”  in  what  they  were  doing. 

What  is  the  meaning  of  it  ? 

All  these  people  are  within  half  an  hour  of  reaching  the 
place  where,  in  order  to  provide  a wealthy  young  man  with 
three  thousand  rubles  stolen  from  a whole  community  of 


294 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


famishing  peasants,  they  may  be  forced  to  commit  the  most 
horrible  acts  one  can  conceive,  to  murder  or  torture,  as  was 
done  in  Orel,  innocent  beings,  their  brothers.  And  they 
see  the  place  and  time  approaching  with  untroubled 
serenity. 

To  say  that  all  these  government  officials,  officers,  and 
soldiers  do  not  know  what  is  before  them  is  impossible,  for 
they  are  prepared  for  it.  The  governor  must  have  given 
directions  about  the  rods,  the  officials  must  have  sent  an 
order  for  them,  purchased  them,  and  entered  the  item  in 
their  accounts.  The  military  officers  have  given  and  re- 
ceived orders  about  cartridges.  They  all  know  that  they 
are  going  to  torture,  perhaps  to  kill,  their  famishing  fellow- 
creatures,  and  that  they  must  set  to  work  within  an  hour. 

To  say,  as  is  usually  said,  and  as  they  would  themselves 
repeat,  that  they  are  acting  from  conviction  of  the  necessity 
for  supporting  the  state  organization,  would  be  a mistake. 
For  in  the  first  place,  these  men  have  probably  never  even 
thought  about  state  organization  and  the  necessity  of  it  ; 
in  the  second  place,  they  cannot  possibly  be  convinced  that 
the  act  in  which  they  are  taking  part  will  tend  to  support 
rather  than  to  ruin  the  state  ; and  thirdly,  in  reality  the  ma- 
jority, if  not  all,  of  these  men,  far  from  ever  sacrificing 
their  own  pleasure  or  tranquillity  to  support  the  state,  never 
let  slip  an  opportunity  of  profiting  at  the  expense  of  the 
state  in  every  way  they  can  increase  their  own  pleasure 
and  ease.  So  that  they  are  not  acting  thus  for  the  sake  of 
the  abstract  principle  of  the  state. 

What  is  the  meaning  of  it  ? 

Yet  I know  all  these  men.  If  I don’t  know  all  of  them 
personally,  I know  their  characters  pretty  nearly,  their  past, 
and  their  way  of  thinking.  They  certainly  all  have  mothers, 
some  of  them  wives  and*  children.  They  are  certainly  for 
the  most  part  good,  kind,  even  tender-hearted  fellows,  who 
hate  every  sort  of  cruelty,  not  to  speak  of  murder  ; many 


IS  WITIinV  YOU." 


295 


of  them  would  not  kill  or  hurt  an  animal.  Moreover,  they 
are  all  professed  Christians  and  regard  all  violence  di-  . 
rected  against  the  defenseless  as  base  and  disgraceful.  ■ 

Certainly  not  one  of  them  would  be  capable  in  everyday  ■ 
life,  for  his  own  personal  profit,  of  doing  a hundredth  part 
of  what  the  Governor  of  Orel  did.  Every  one  of  them  | 
would  be  insulted  at  the  supposition  that  he  was  capable  1 
of  doing  anything  of  the  kind  in  private  life. 

And  yet  they  are  within  half  an  hour  of  reaching  the 
place  where  they  may  be  reduced  to  the  inevitable  neces- 
sity of  committing  this  crime. 

What  is  the  meaning  of  it  ? 

But  it  is  not  only  these  men  who  are  going  by  train  pre- 
pared for  murder  and  torture.  How  could  the  men  who 
began  the  whole  business,  the  landowner,  the  commis- 
sioner, the  judges,  and  those  who  gave  the  order  and  are 
responsible  for  it,  the  ministers,  the  Tzar,  who  are  also 
good  men,  professed  Christians,  how  could  they  elaborate 
such  a plan  and  assent  to  it,  knowing  its  consequences  ? 
The  spectators  even,  who  took  no  part  in  the  affair,  how 
could  they,  who  are  indignant  at  the  sight  of  any  cruelty 
in  private  life,  even  the  overtaxing  of  a horse,  allow  such 
a horrible  deed  to  be  perpetrated  ? How  was  it  they  did 
not  rise  in  indignation  and  bar  the  roads,  shouting,  “ No  ; 
flog  and  kill  starving  men  because  they  won’t  let  their  last 
possession  be  stolen  from  them  without  resistance,  that  we 
won’t  allow  ! ” But  far  from  anyone  doing  this,  the 
majority,  even  of  those  who  were  the  cause  of  the  affair, 
such  as  the  commissioner,  the  landowner,  the  judge,  and 
those  who  took  part  in  it  and  arranged  it,  as  the  governor, 
the  ministers,  and  the  Tzar,  are  perfectly  tranquil  and  do 
not  even  feel  a prick  of  conscience.  And  apparently  all 
the  men  who  are  going  to  carry  out  this  crime  are  equally 
undisturbed. 

The  spectators,  who  one  would  suppose  could  have  no 


296 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


personal  interest  in  the  affair,  looked  rather  with  sympathy 
than  with  disapproval  at  all  these  people  preparing  to 
carry  out  this  infamous  action.  In  the  same  compartment 
with  me  was  a wood  merchant,  who  had  risen  from  a 
peasant.  He  openly  expressed  aloud  his  sympathy  with 
such  punishments.  “ They  can’t  disobey  the  authorities,” 
he  said  ; “ that’s  what  the  authorities  are  for.  Let  them 
have  a lesson  ; send  their  fleas  flying  ! They’ll  give  over 
making  commotions,  I warrant  you.  That’s  what  they 
want.” 

What  is  the  meaning  of  it  ? 

It  is  not  possible  to  say  that  all  these  people  who  have 
provoked  or  aided  or  allowed  this  deed  are  such  worthless 
creatures  that,  knowing  all  the  infamy  of  what  they  are 
doing,  they  do  it  against  their  principles,  some  for  pay  and 
for  profit,  others  through  fear  of  punishment.  All  of  them 
in  certain  circumstances  know  how  to  stand  up  for  their 
principles.  Not  one  of  these  officials  would  steal  a purse, 
read  another  man’s  letter,  or  put  up  with  an  affront  without 
demanding  satisfaction.  Not  one  of  these  officers  would 
consent  to  cheat  at  cards,  would  refuse  to  pay  a debt  of 
honor,  would  betray  a comrade,  run  away  on  the  field 
of  battle,  or  desert  the  flag.  Not  one  of  these  soldiers 
would  spit  out  the  holy  sacrament  or  eat  meat  on  Good 
Friday.  All  these  men  are  ready  to  face  any  kind  of 
privation,  suffering,  or  danger  rather  than  consent  to  do 
what  they  regard  as  wrong.  They  have  therefore  the 
strength  to  resist  doing  what  is  against  their  principles. 

It  is  even  less  possible  to  assert  that  all  these  men  are 
such  brutes  that  it  is  natural  and  not  distasteful  to  them  to 
do  such  deeds.  One  need  only  talk  to  these  people  a little 
to  see  that  all  of  them,  the  landowner  even,  and  the  judge, 
and  the  minister  and  the  Tzar  and  the  government,  the 
officers  and  the  soldiers,  not  only  disapprove  of  such  things 
in  the  depth  of  their  soul,  but  suffer  from  the  consciousness 


Is  WITHIN  YOU."  297 

of  their  participation  in  them  when  they  recollect  what  they 
imply.  But  they  try  not  to  think  about  it. 

One  need  only  talk  to  any  of  these  who  are  taking  part 
in  the  affair  from  the  landowner  to  the  lowest  policeman  or 
soldier  to  see  that  in  the  depth  of  their  soul  they  all  know 
it  is  a wicked  thing,  that  it  would  be  better  to  have  nothing 
to  do  with  it,  and  are  suffering  from  the  knowledge. 

A lady  of  liberal  views,  who  was  traveling  in  the  same 
train  with  us,  seeing  the  governor  and  the  officers  in  the 
first-class  saloon  and  learning  the  object  of  the  expedition, 
began,  intentionally  raising  her  voice  so  that  they  should 
hear,  to  abuse  the  existing  order  of  things  and  to  cry  shame 
on  men  who  would  take  part  in  such  proceedings.  Every- 
one felt  awkward,  none  knew  where  to  look,  but  no  one 
contradicted  her.  They  tried  to  look  as  though  such 
remarks  were  not  worth  answering.  But  one  could  see  by 
their  faces  and  their  averted  eyes  that  they  were  ashamed. 

I noticed  the  same  thing  in  the  soldiers.  They  too  knew 
that  what  they  were  sent  to  do  was  a shameful  thing,  but 
they  did  not  want  to  think  about  what  was  before  them. 

When  the  wood  merchant,  as  I suspect  insincerely  only 
to  show  that  he  was  a man  of  education,  began  to  speak  of 
the  necessity  of  such  measures,  the  soldiers  who  heard  him 
all  turned  away  from  him,  scowling  and  pretending  not  to 
hear. 

All  the  men  who,  like  the  landowner,  the  commissioner, 
the  minister,  and  the  Tzar,  were  responsible  for  the  per- 
petration of  this  act,  as  well  as  those  who  were  now  going 
to  execute  it,  and  even  those  who  were  mere  spectators  of 
it,  knew  that  it  was  a wickedness,  and  were  ashamed  of  tak- 
ing any  share  in  it,  and  even  of  being  present  at  it. 

Then  why  did  they  do  it,  or  allow  it  to  be  done  ? 

Ask  them  the  question.  And  the  landowner  who  started 
the  affair,  and  the  judge  who  pronounced  a clearly  unjust  j 
even  though  formally  legal  decision,  and  those  who  com-  / 


298 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OE  GOD 


I manded  the  execution  of  the  decision,  and  those  who,  like 
the  policemen,  soldiers,  hnd  peasants,  will  execute  the  deed 
with  their  own  hands,  flogging  and  killing  their  brothers,  all 
who  have  devised,  abetted,  decreed,  executed,  or  allowed 
such  crimes,  will  make  substantially  the  same  reply. 

The  authorities,  those  who  have  started,  devised,  and 
decreed  the  matter,  will  say  that  such  acts  are  necessary  for 
the  maintenance  of  the  existing  order  ; the  maintenance 
of  the  existing  order  is  necessary  for  the  welfare  of  the 
country  and  of  humanity,  for  the  possibility  of  social 
\ existence  and  human  progress. 

Men  of  the  poorer  class,  peasants  and  soldiers,  who  will 
have  to  execute  the  deed  of  violence  with  their  own  hands, 
say  that  they  do  so  because  it  is  the  command  of  their 
superior  authority,  and  the  superior  authority  knows  what 
he  is  about.  That  those  are  in  authority  who  ought  to  be 
in  authority,  and  that  they  know  what  they  are  doing  ap- 
pears to  them  a truth  of  which  there  can  be  no  doubt.  If 
they  could  admit  the  possibility  of  mistake  or  error,  it 
would  only  be  in  functionaries  of  a lower  grade ; the 
highest  authority  on  which  all  the  rest  depends  seems  to 
them  immaculate  beyond  suspicion. 

Though  expressing  the  motives  of  their  conduct  differ- 
ently, both  those  in  command  and  their  subordinates  are 
agreed  in  saying  that  they  act  thus  because  the  existing 
order  is  the  order  which  must  and  ought  to  exist  at  the 
present  time,  and  that  therefore  to  support  it  is  the  sacred 
duty  of  every  man. 

On  this  acceptance  of  the  necessity  and  therefore  immu- 
tability of  the  existing  order,  all  who  take  part  in  acts  of 
violence  on  the  part  of  government  base  the  argument 
always  advanced  in  their  justification.  “Since  the  existing 
order  is  immutable,”  they  say,  “the  refusal  of  a single 
individual  to  perform  the  duties  laid  upon  him  will  effect 
no  change  in  things,  and  will  only  mean  that  some  other 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


299 


man  will  be  put  in  his  place  who  may  do  the  work  worse, 
that  is  to  say,  more  cruelly,  to  the  still  greater  injury  of  the 
victims  of  the  act  of  violence.” 

This  conviction  that  the  existing  order  is  the  necessary 
and  therefore  immutable  order,  which  it  is  a sacred  duty 
for  every  man  to  support,  enables  good  men,  of  high  prin- 
ciples in  private  life,  to  take  part  with  conscience  more  or 
less  untroubled  in  crimes  such  as  that  perpetrated  in  Orel, 
and  that  which  the  men  in  the  Toula  train  were  going  ^ 
perpetrate. 

But  what  is  this  conviction  based  on  ? It  is  easy  to  un- 
derstand that  the  landowner  prefers  to  believe  that  the 
existing  order  is  inevitable  and  immutable,  because  this  ex- 
isting order  secures  him  an  income  from  his  hundreds  and 
thousands  of  acres,  by  means  of  which  he  can  lead  his 
habitual  indolent  and  luxurious  life. 

It  is  easy  to  understand  that  the  judge  readily  believes 
in  the  necessity  of  an  order  of  things  through  which  he 
receives  a wage  fifty  times  as  great  as  the  most  industrious 
laborer  can  earn,  and  the  same  applies  to  all  the  higher 
officials.  It  is  only  under  the  existing  regime  that  as  gov- 
ernor, prosecutor,  senator,  members  of  the  various  councils, 
they  can  receive  their  several  thousands  of  rubles  a year, 
without  which  they  and  their  families  would  at  once  sink 
into  ruin,  since  if  it  were  not  for  the  position  they  occupy 
they  would  never  by  their  own  abilities,  industry,  or  acquire- 
ments get  a thousandth  part  of  their  salaries.  The  minister, 
the  Tzar,  and  all  the  higher  authorities  are  in  the  same  posi- 
tion. The  only  distinction  is  that  the  higher  and  the  more 
exceptional  their  position,  the  more  necessary  it  is  for  them 
to  believe  that  the  existing  order  is  the  only  possible  order 
of  things.  For  without  it  they  would  not  only  be  unable  to 
gain  an  equal  position,  but  would  be  found  to  fall  lower 
than  all  other  people.  A man  who  has  of  his  own  free  will 
entered  the  police  force  at  a wage  of  ten  rubles,  which  he 


300 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


could  easily  earn  in  any  other  position,  is  hardly  dependent 
on  the  preservation  of  the  existing  regime,  and  so  he  may 
not  believe  in  its  immutability.  But  a king  or  an  emperor, 
who  receives  millions  for  his  post,  and  knows  that  there  are 
thousands  of  people  round  him  who  would  like  to  dethrone 
him  and  take  his  place,  who  knows  that  he  will  never 
receive  such  a revenue  or  so  much  honor  in  any  other  posi- 
tion, who  knows,  in  most  cases  through  his  more  or  less 
despotic  rule,  that  if  he  were  dethroned  he  would  have  to 
answer  for  all  his  abuse  of  power — he  cannot  but  believe 
in  the  necessity  and  even  sacredness  of  the  existing  order. 
The  higher  and  the  more  profitable  a man’s  position,  the 
more  unstable  it  becomes,  and  the  more  terrible  and  dan- 
gerous a fall  from  it  for  him,  the  more  firmly  the  man 
believes  in  the  existing  order,  and  therefore  with  the  more 
ease  of  conscience  can  such  a man  perpetrate  cruel  and 
wicked  acts,  as  though  they  were  not  in  his  own  interest, 
but  for  the  maintenance  of  that  order. 

This  is  the  case  with  all  men  in  authority,  who  occupy 
positions  more  profitable  than  they  could  occupy  except 
for  the  present  regime,  from  the  lowest  police  officer  to  the 
Tzar.  All  of  them  are  more  or  less  convinced  that  the 
existing  order  is  immutable,  because — the  chief  considera- 
tion— it  is  to  their  advantage.  But  the  peasants,  the  sol- 
diers, who  are  at  the  bottom  of  the  social  scale,  who  have  no 
kind  of  advantage  from  the  existing  order,  who  are  in  the 
very  lowest  position  of  subjection  and  humiliation,  what 
forces  them  to  believe  that  the  existing  order  in  which  they 
are  in  their  humble  and  disadvantageous  position  is  the 
order  which  ought  to  exist,  and  which  they  ought  to  sup- 
port even  at  the  cost  of  evil  actions  contrary  to  their  con- 
science ? 

What  forces  these  men  to  the  false  reasoning  that  the 
existing  order  is  unchanging,  and  that  therefore  they 
ought  to  support  it,  when  it  is  so  obvious,  on  the  contrary. 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


301 


that  it  is  only  unchanging  because  they  themselves  sup- 
port it  ? 

What  forces  these  peasants,  taken  only  yesterday  from 
the  plow  and  dressed  in  ugly  and  unseemly  costumes  with 
blue  collars  and  gilt  buttons,  to  go  with  guns  and  sabers 
and  murder  their  famishing  fathers  and  brothers  ? They 
gain  no  kind  of  advantage  and  can  be  in  no  fear  of  losing 
the  position  they  occupy,  because  it  is  worse  than  that 
from  which  they  have  been  taken. 

The  persons  in  authority  of  the  higher  orders — land- 
owners,  merchants,  judges,  senators,  governors,  ministers, 
tzars,  and  officers — take  part  in  such  doings  because  the 
existing  order  is  to  their  advantage.  In  other  respects  they 
are  often  good  and  kind-hearted  men,  and  they  are  more 
able  to  take  part  in  such  doings  because  their  share  in  them 
is  limited  to  suggestions,  decisions,  and  orders.  These  per- 
sons in  authority  never  do  themselves  what  they  suggest, 
decide,  or  command  to  be  done.  For  the  most  part  they 
do  not  even  see  how  all  the  atrocious  deeds  they  have 
suggested  and  authorized  are  carried  out.  But  the  unfor- 
tunate men  of  the  lower  orders,  who  gain  no  kind  of  advan- 
tage from  the  existing  rigime,  but,  on  the  contrary,  are 
treated  with  the  utmost  contempt,  support  it  even  by 
dragging  people  with  their  own  hands  from  their  families, 
handcuffing  them,  throwing  them  in  prison,  guarding  them, 
shooting  them. 

Why  do  they  do  it  ? What  forces  them  to  believe  that 
the  existing  order  is  unchanging  and  they  must  support  it  ? 

All  violence  rests,  we  know,  on  those  who  do  the  beat- 
ing, the  handcuffing,  the  imprisoning,  and  the  killing  with 
their  own  hands.  If  there  were  no  soldiers  or  armed 
policemen,  ready  to  kill  or  outrage  anyone  as  they  are 
ordered,  not  one  of  those  people  who  sign  sentences  of 
death,  imprisonment,  or  galley-slavery  for  life  would  make 
up  his  mind  to  hang,  imprison,  or  torture  a thousandth 


302 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


part  of  those  whom,  quietly  sitting  in  his  study,  he  now 
orders  to  be  tortured  in  all  kinds  of  ways,  simply  because 
he  does  not  see  it  nor  do  it  himself,  but  only  gets  it  done 
at  a distance  by  these  servile  tools. 

All  the  acts  of  injustice  and  cruelty  which  are  committed 
in  the  ordinary  course  of  daily  life  have  only  become 
habitual  because  there  are  these  men  always  ready  to 
carry  out  such  acts  of  injustice  and  cruelty.  If  it  were 
not  for  them,  far  from  anyone  using  violence  against  the 
immense  masses  who  are  now  ill-treated,  those  who  now 
command  their  punishment  would  not  venture  to  sentence 
them,  would  not  even  dare  to  dream  of  the  sentences  they 
decree  with  such  easy  confidence  at  present.  And  if  it 
were  not  for  these  men,  ready  to  kill  or  torture  anyone  at 
their  commander’s  will,  no  one  would  dare  to  claim,  as  all 
the  idle  landowners  claim  with  such  assurance,  that  a piece 
of  land,  surrounded  by  peasants,  who  are  in  wretchedness 
from  want  of  land,  is  the  property  of  a man  who  does  not 
cultivate  it,  or  that  stores  of  corn  taken  by  swindling  from 
the  peasants  ought  to  remain  untouched  in  the  midst  of  a 
population  dying  of  hunger  because  the  merchants  must 
make  their  profit.  If  it  were  not  for  these  servile  instru- 
ments at  the  disposal  of  the  authorities,  it  could  never  have 
entered  the  head  of  the  landowner  to  rob  the  peasants  of 
the  forest  they  had  tended,  nor  of  the  officials  to  think  they 
are  entitled  to  their  salaries,  taken  from  the  famishing  peo- 
ple, the  price  of  their  oppression  ; least  of  all  could  anyone 
dream  of  killing  or  exiling  men  for  exposing  falsehood  and 
telling  the  truth.  All  this  can  only  be  done  because  the 
authorities  are  confidently  assured  that  they  have  always 
these  servile  tools  at  hand,  ready  to  carry  all  their  demands 
into  effect  by  means  of  torture  and  murder. 

All  the  deeds  of  violence  of  tyrants  from  Napoleon  to 
the  lowest  commander  of  a company  who  fires  upon  a 
crowd,  can  only  be  explained  by  the  intoxicating  effect  of 


/S  WlTHm  YOU." 


303 

their  absolute  power  over  these  slaves.  All  force,  there- 
fore, rests  on  these  men,  who  carry  out  the  deeds  of  violence 
with  their  own  hands,  the  men  who  serve  in  the  police  or 
the  army,  especially  the  army,  for  the  police  only  venture 
to  do  their  work  because  the  army  is  at  their  back. 

What,  then,  has  brought  these  masses  of  honest  men,  on 
whom  the  whole  thing  depends,  who  gain  nothing  by  it, 
and  who  have  to  do  these  atrocious  deeds  with  their  own 
hands,  what  has  brought  them  to  accept  the  amazing  delu- 
sion that  the  existing  order,  unprofitable,  ruinous,  and  fatal 
as  it  is  for  them,  is  the  order  which  ought  to  exist  ? 

Who  has  led  them  into  this  amazing  delusion  ? 

They  can  never  have  persuaded  themselves  that  they 
ought  to  do  what  is  against  their  conscience,  and  also  the 
source  of  misery  and  ruin  for  themselves,  and  all  their 
class,  who  make  up  nine-tenths  of  the  population. 

“ How  can  you  kill  people,  when  it  is  written  in  God’s 
commandment ; ‘ Thou  shalt  not  kill  ’ ? ” I have  often 
inquired  of  different  soldiers.  And  I always  drove  them 
to  embarrassment  and  confusion  by  reminding  them  of 
what  they  did  not  want  to  think  about.  They  knew  they 
were  bound  by  the  law  of  God,  “ Thou  shalt  not  kill,”  and 
knew  too  that  they  were  bound  by  their  duty  as  soldiers, 
but  had  never  reflected  on  the  contradiction  between  these 
duties.  The  drift  of  the  timid  answers  I received  to  this 
question  was  always  approximately  this  : that  killing  in 
war  and  executing  criminals  by  command  of  the  govern- 
ment are  not  included  in  the  general  prohibition  of  murder. 
But  when  I said  this  distinction  was  not  made  in  the  law 
of  God,  and  reminded  them  of  the  Christian  duty  of  frater- 
nity, forgiveness  of  injuries,  and  love,  which  could  not  be 
reconciled  with  murder,  the  peasants  usually  agreed,  but  in 
their  turn  began  to  ask  me  questions.  “ How  does  it  hap- 
pen,” they  inquired,  “ that  the  government  [which  accord- 
ing to  their  ideas  cannot  do  wrong]  sends  the  army  to  war 


3*4 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


and  orders  criminals  to  be  executed.”  When  I answered 
that  the  government  does  wrong  in  giving  such  orders,  the 
peasants  fell  into  still  greater  confusion,  and  either  broke 
off  the  conversation  or  else  got  angry  with  me. 

“ They  must  have  found  a law  for  it.  The  archbishops 
know  as  much  about  it  as  we  do,  I should  hope,”  a Russian 
soldier  once  observed  to  me.  And  in  saying  this  the  soldier 
obviously  set  his  mind  at  rest,  in  the  full  conviction  that 
his  spiritual  guides  had  found  a law  which  authorized  his 
ancestors,  and  the  tzars  and  their  descendants,  and  millions 
of  men,  to  serve  as  he  was  doing  himself,  and  that  the 
question  I had  put  him  was  a kind  of  hoax  or  conundrum 
on  my  part. 

Everyone  in  our  Christian  society  knows,  either  by  tradi- 
tion or  by  revelation  or  by  the  voice  of  conscience,  that 
murder  is  one  of  the  most  fearful  crimes  a man  can  commit, 
as  the  Gospel  tells  us,  and  that  the  sin  of  murder  cannot 
be  limited  to  certain  persons,  that  is,  murder  cannot  be  a 
sin  for  some  and  not  a sin  for  others.  Everyone  knows 
that  if  murder  is  a sin,  it  is  always  a sin,  whoever  are  the 
victims  murdered;  just  like  the  sin  of  adultery,  theft,  or  any 
other.  At  the  same  time  from  their  childhood  up  men  see 
that  murder  is  not  only  permitted,  but  even  sanctioned  by 
the  blessing  of  those  whom  they  are  accustomed  to  regard 
as  their  divinely  appointed  spiritual  guides,  and  see  their 
secular  leaders  with  calm  assurance  organizing  murder, 
proud  to  wear  murderous  arms,  and  demanding  of  others 
in  the  name  of  the. laws  of  the  country,  and  even  of  God, 
that  they  should  take  part  in  murder.  Men  see  that  there 
is  some  inconsistency  here,  but  not  being  able  to  analyze  it, 
involuntarily  assume  that  this  apparent  inconsistency  is 
only  the  result  of  their  ignorance.  The  very  grossness 
and  obviousness  of  the  inconsistency  confirms  them  in  this 
conviction. 

They  cannot  imagine  that  the  leaders  of  civilization,  the 


75  WITHIN  YOU." 


305 


educated  classes,  could  so  confidently  preach  two  such 
opposed  principles  as  the  law  of  Christ  and  murder.  A 
simple  uncorrupted  youth  cannot  imagine  that  those  who 
stand  so  high  in  his  opinion,  whom  he  regards  as  holy  or 
learned  men,  could  for  any  object  whatever  mislead  him  so 
shamefully.  But  this  is  just  what  has  always  been  and 
always  is  done  to  him.  It  is  done  (i)  by  instilling,  by 
example  and  direct  instruction,  from  childhood  up,  into 
the  working  people,  who  have  not  time  to  study  moral  and 
religious  questions  for  themselves,  the  idea  that  torture  and 
murder  are  compatible  with  Christianity,  and  that  for  cer- 
tain objects  of  state,  torture  and  murder  are  not  only 
admissible,  but  ought  to  be  employed  ; and  (2)  by  instilling 
into  certain  of  the  people,  who  have  either  voluntarily 
enlisted  or  been  taken  by  compulsion  into  the  army,  the 
idea  that  the  perpetration  of  murder  and  torture  with  their 
own  hands  is  a sacred  duty,  and  even  a glorious  exploit, 
worthy  of  praise  and  reward. 

The  general  delusion  is  diffused  among  all  people  by 
means  of  the  catechisms  or  books,  which  nowadays  replace 
them,  in  use  for  the  compulsory  education  of  children.  In 
them  it  is  stated  that  violence,  that  is,  imprisonment  and 
execution,  as  well  as  murder  in  civil  or  foreign  war  in  the 
defense  and  maintenance  of  the  existing  state  organization 
(whatever  that  may  be,  absolute  or  limited  monarchy,  con- 
vention, consulate,  empire  of  this  or  that  Napoleon  or 
Boulanger,  constitutional  monarchy,  commune  or  republic) 
is  absolutely  lawful  and  not  opposed  to  morality  and 
Christianity. 

This  is  stated  in  all  catechisms  or  books  used  in  schools. 
And  men  are  so  thoroughly  persuaded  of  it  that  they  grow 
up,  live  and  die  in  that  conviction  without  once  entertaining 
a doubt  about  it. 

This  is  one  form  of  deception,  the  general  deception 
instilled  into  everyone,  but  there  is  another  special  decep- 


3o6 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


tion  practiced  upon  the  soldiers  or  police  who  are  picked 
out  by  one  means  or  another  to  do  the  torturing  and 
murdering  necessary  to  defend  and  maintain  the  existing 
regime. 

In  all  military  instructions  there  appears  in  one  form  or 
another  what  is  expressed  in  the  Russian  military  code  in 
the  following  words  : 

Article  87.  To  carry  out  exactly  and  without  comment 
the  orders  of  a superior  officer  means  : to  carry  out  an 
order  received  from  a superior  officer  exactly  without  con- 
sidering  whether  it  is  good  or  not,  and  whether  it  is  pos- 
sible to  carry  it  out.  The  superior  officer  is  responsible 
for  the  consequences  of  the  order  he  gives. 

Article  88.  The  subordinate  ought  never  to  refuse  to 
carry  out  the  orders  of  a superior  officer  except  when  he 
sees  clearly  that  in  carrying  out  his  superior  officer’s  com- 
mand, he  breaks  [the  law  of  God,  one  involuntarily  expects  ; 
not  at  all]  his  oath  of  fidelity  and  allegiafice  to  the  Tzar. 

It  is  here  said  that  the  man  who  is  a soldier  can  and 
ought  to  carry  out  all  the  orders  of  his  superior  without 
exception.  And  as  these  orders  for  the  most  part  involve 
murder,  it  follows  that  he  ought  to  break  all  the  laws  of 
God  and  man.  The  one  law  he  may  not  break  is  that  of 
fidelity  and  allegiance  to  the  man  who  happens  at  a given 
moment  to  be  in  power. 

Precisely  the  same  thing  is  said  in  other  words  in  all 
codes  of  military  instruction.  And  it  could  not  be  other- 
wise, since  the  whole  power  of  the  army  and  the  state  is 
based  in  reality  on  this  delusive  emancipation  of  men  from 
their  duty  to  God  and  their  conscience,  and  the  substitu- 
tion  of  duty  to  their  superior  officer  for  all  other  duties. 

This,  then,  is  the  foundation  of  the  belief  of  the  lower 
classes  that  the  existing  re'gime  so  fatal  for  them  is  the 
rdgime  which  ought  to  exist,  and  which  they  ought  there- 
fore to  support  even  by  torture  and  murder. 


IS  WITHm  YOU." 


307 


This  belief  is  founded  on  a conscious  deception  practiced 
on  them  by  the  higher  classes. 

And  it  cannot  be  otherwise.  To  compel  the  lower  classes, 
which  are  more  numerous,  to  oppress  and  ill  treat  them- 
selves, even  at  the  cost  of  actions  opposed  to  their  con- 
science, it  was  necessary  to  deceive  them.  And  it  has 
been  done  accordingly. 

Not  many  days  ago  I saw  once  more  this  shameless 
deception  being  openly  practiced,  and  once  more  I mar- 
veled that  it  could  be  practiced  so  easily  and  impudently. 

At  the  beginning  of  November,  as  I was  passing  through 
Toula,  I saw  once  again  at  the  gates  of  the  Zemsky  Court- 
house the  crowd  of  peasants  I had  so  often  seen  before, 
and  heard  the  drunken  shouts  of  the  men  mingled  with  the 
pitiful  lamentations  of  their  wives  and  mothers.  It  was  the 
recruiting  session. 

I can  never  pass  by  the  spectacle.  It  attracts  me  by  a 
kind  of  fascination  of  repulsion.  I again  went  into  the 
crowd,  took  my  stand  among  the  peasants,  looked  about 
and  asked  questions.  And  once  again  I was  amazed  that 
this  hideous  crime  can  be  perpetrated  so  easily  in  broad 
daylight  and  in  the  midst  of  a large  town. 

As  the  custom  is  every  year,  in  all  the  villages  and  ham- 
lets of  the  one  hundred  millions  of  Russians,  on  the  ist  of 
November,  the  village  elders  had  assembled  the  young  men 
inscribed  on  the  lists,  often  their  own  sons  among  them, 
and  had  brought  them  to  the  town. 

On  the  road  the  recruits  have  been  drinking  without 
intermission,  unchecked  by  the  elders,  who  feel  that  going- 
on  such  an  insane  errand,  abandoning  their  wives  and 
mothers  and  renouncing  all  they  hold  sacred  in  order  to 
become  a senseless  instrument  of  destruction,  would  be  too 
agonizing  if  they  were  not  stupefied  with  spirits. 

And  so  they  have  come,  drinking,  swearing,  singing, 
fighting  and  scuffling  with  one  another.  They  have  spent 


3o8 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


the  night  in  taverns.  In  the  morning  they  have  slept  off 
their  drunkenness  and  have  gathered  together  at  the 
Zemsky  Court-house. 

Some  of  them,  in  new  sheepskin  pelisses,  with  knitted 
scarves  round  their  necks,  their  eyes  swollen  from  drink- 
ing,  are  shouting  wildly  to  one  another  to  show  their  cour- 
age ; others,  crowded  near  the  door,  are  quietly  and  mourn- 
fully waiting  their  turn,  between  their  weeping  wives  and 
mothers  (I  had  chanced  upon  the  day  of  the  actual  enroll- 
ing, that  is,  the  examination  of  those  whose  names  are  on 
the  list)  ; others  meantime  were  crowding  into  the  hall  of 
the  recruiting  office. 

Inside  the  office  the  work  was  going  on  rapidly.  The 
door  is  opened  and  the  guard  calls  Piotr  Sidorov.  Piotr 
Sidorov  starts,  crosses  himself,  and  goes  into  a little  room 
with  a glass  door,  where  the  conscripts  undress.  A com- 
rade of  Piotr  Sidorov’s,  who  has  just  been  passed  for 
service,  and  come  naked  out  of  the  revision  office,  is  dress- 
ing hurriedly,  his  teeth  chattering.  Sidorov  has  already 
heard  the  news,  and  can  see  from  his  face  too  that  he  has 
been  taken.  He  wants  to  ask  him  questions,  but  they 
hurry  him  and  tell  him  to  make  haste  and  undress.  He 
throws  off  his  pelisse,  slips  his  boots  off  his  feet,  takes  off 
his  waistcoat  and  draws  his  shirt  over  his  head,  and  naked, 
trembling  all  over,  and  exhaling  an  odor  of  tobacco,  spirits, 
and  sweat,  goes  into  the  revision  office,  not  knowing  what 
to  do  with  his  brawny  bare  arms. 

Directly  facing  him  in  the  revision  office  hangs  in  a great 
gold  frame  a portrait  of  the  Tzar  in  full  uniform  with  decora- 
tions, and  in  the  corner  a little  portrait  of  Christ  in  a shirt 
and  a crown  of  thorns.  In  the  middle  of  the  room  is  a 
table  covered  with  green  cloth,  on  which  there  are  papers 
lying  and  a three-cornered  ornament  surmounted  by  an 
eagle — the  zertzal.  Round  the  table  are  sitting  the  revising 
officers,  looking  collected  and  indifferent.  One  is  smoking 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


309 


a cigarette  ; another  is  looking  through  some  papers. 
Directly  Sidorov  comes  in,  a guard  goes  up  to  him,  places 
him  under  the  measuring  frame,  raising  him  under  his 
chin,  and  straightening  his  legs. 

The  man  with  the  cigarette — he  is  the  doctor — comes  up, 
and  without  looking  at  the  recruit’s  face,  but  somewhere 
beyond  it,  feels  his  body  over  with  an  air  of  disgust, 
measures  him,  tests  him,  tells  the  guard  to  open  his  mouth, 
tells  him  to  breathe,  to  speak.  Someone  notes  something 
down.  At  last  without  having  once  looked  him  in  the  face 
the  doctor  says,  “ Right.  Next  one  ! ” and  with  a weary 
air  sits  down  again  at  the  table.  The  soldiers  again  hustle 
and  hurry  the  lad.  He  somehow  gets  into  his  trousers, 
wraps  his  feet  in  rags,  puts  on  his  boots,  looks  for  his  scarf 
and  cap,  and  bundles  his  pelisse  under  his  arm.  Then  they 
lead  him  into  the  main  hall,  shutting  him  off  apart  from 
the  rest  by  a bench,  behind  which  all  the  conscripts  who 
have  been  passed  for  service  are  waiting.  Another  village 
lad  like  himself,  but  from  a distant  province,  now  a soldier 
armed  with  a gun  with  a sharp-pointed  bayonet  at  the  end, 
keeps  watch  over  him,  ready  to  run  him  through  the  body 
if  he  should  think  of  trying  to  escape. 

Meantime  the  crowd  of  fathers,  mothers,  and  wives, 
hustled  by  the  police,  are  pressing  round  the  doors  to  hear 
whose  lad  has  been  taken,  whose  is  let  off.  One  of  the 
rejected  comes  out  and  announces  that  Piotr  is  taken,  and 
at  once  a shrill  cry  is  heard  from  Piotr’s  young  wife,  for 
whom  this  word  “taken  ” means  separation  for  four  or  five 
years,  the  life  of  a soldier’s  wife  as  a servant,  often  a pros- 
titute. 

But  here  comes  a man  along  the  street  with  flowing  hair 
and  in  a peculiar  dress,  who  gets  out  of  his  droskhy  and 
goes  into  the  Zemsky  Court-house.  The  police  clear  a way 
for  him  through  the  crowd.  It  is  the  “ reverend  father  ’’ 
come  to  administer  the  oath.  And  this  “ father,”  who  has 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


310 

been  persuaded  that  he  is  specially  and  exclusively  devoted 
to  the  service  of  Christ,  and  who,  for  the  most  part,  does 
not  himself  see  the  deception  in  which  he  lives,  goes  into 
the  hall  where  the  conscripts  are  waiting.  He  throws 
round  him  a kind  of  curtain  of  brocade,  pulls  his  long  hair 
out  over  it,  opens  the  very  Gospel  in  which  swearing  is 
forbidden,  takes  the  cross,  the  very  cross  on  which  Christ 
was  crucified  because  he  would  not  do  what  this  false  servant 
of  his  is  telling  men  to  do,  and  puts  them  on  the  lectern. 
And  all  these  unhappy,  defenseless,  and  deluded  lads 
repeat  after  him  the  lie,  which  he  utters  with  the  assurance 
of  familiarity. 

He  reads  and  they  repeat  after  him  : 

“ I promise  and  swear  by  Almighty  God  upon  his  holy 
Gospel,”  etc.,  “ to  defend,”  etc.,  and  that  is,  to  murder  any- 
one I am  told  to,  and  to  do  everything  I am  told  by  men  I 
know  nothing  of,  and  who  care  nothing  for  me  except  as 
an  instrument  for  perpetrating  the  crimes  by  which  they 
are  kept  in  their  position  of  power,  and  my  brothers  in  their 
condition  of  misery.  All  the  conscripts  repeat  these  ferO’ 
cious  words  without  thinking.  And  then  the  so-called 
“ father  ” goes  away  with  a sense  of  having  correctly  and 
conscientiously  done  his  duty.  And  all  these  poor  deluded 
lads  believe  that  these  nonsensical  and  incomprehensible 
words  which  they  have  just  uttered  set  them  free  for  the 
whole  time  of  their  service  from  their  duties  as  men,  and 
lay  upon  them  fresh  and  more  binding  duties  as  soldiers. 

And  this  crime  is  perpetrated  publicly  and  no  one  cries 
out  to  the  deceiving  and  the  deceived  : ” Think  what  you 
are  doing ; this  is  the  basest,  falsest  lie,  by  which  not 
bodies  only,  but  souls  too,  are  destroyed.” 

No  one  does  this.  On  the  contrary,  when  all  have  been 
enrolled,  and  they  are  to  be  let  out  again,  the  military  offi- 
cer goes  with  a confident  and  majestic  air  into  the  hall 
where  the  drunken,  cheated  lads  are  shut  up,  and  cries  in  a 


IS  ivimiAr  YOU." 


3” 


bold,  military  voice  : “ Your  health,  my  lads  ! I congratu- 
late you  on  ‘ serving  the  Tzar  ! ’ ” And  they,  poor  fellows 
(someone  has  given  them  a hint  beforehand),  mutter  awk- 
wardly, their  voices  thick  with  drink,  something  to  the  effect 
that  they  are  glad. 

Meantime  the  crowd  of  fathers,  mothers,  and  wives  is 
standing  at  the  doors  waiting.  The  women  keep  their  tear- 
ful eyes  fixed  on  the  doors.  They  open  at  last,  and  out 
come  the  conscripts,  unsteady,  but  trying  to  put  a good  face 
on  it.  Here  are  Piotr  and  Vania  and  Makar  trying  not 
to  look  their  dear  ones  in  the  face.  Nothing  is  heard  but 
the  wailing  of  the  wives  and  mothers.  Some  of  the  lads 
embrace  them  and  weep  with  them,  others  make  a show  of 
courage,  and  others  try  to  comfort  them. 

The  wives  and  mothers,  knowing  that  they  will  be  left  for 
three,  four,  or  five  years  without  their  breadwinners,  weep 
and  rehearse  their  woes  aloud.  The  fathers  say  little.  They 
only  utter  a clucking  sound  with  their  tongues  and  sigh 
mournfully,  knowing  that  they  will  see  no  more  of  the 
steady  lads  they  have  reared  and  trained  to  help  them,  that 
they  will  come  back  not  the  same  quiet  hard-working  labor- 
ers, but  for  the  most  part  conceited  and  demoralized, 
unfitted  for  their  simple  life. 

And  then  all  the  crowd  get  into  their  sledges  again  and 
move  away  down  the  street  to  the  taverns  and  pot-houses, 
and  louder  than  ever  sounds  the  medley  of  singing  and 
sobbing,  drunken  shouts,  and  the  wailing  of  the  wives  and 
mothers,  the  sounds  of  the  accordeon  and  oaths.  They 
all  turn  into  the  taverns,  whose  revenues  go  to  the  govern- 
ment, and  the  drinking  bout  begins,  which  stifles  their 
sense  of  the  wrong  which  is  being  done  them. 

For  two  or  three  weeks  they  go  on  living  at  home,  and 
most  of  that  time  they  are  “ jaunting,”  that  is,  drinking. 

On  a fixed  day  they  collect  them,  drive  them  together 
like  a flock  of  sheep,  and  begin  to  train  them  in  the  military 


312 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


exercises  and  drill.  Their  teachers  are  fellows  like  them- 
selves,  only  deceived  and  brutalized  two  or  three  years 
sooner.  The  means  of  instruction  are  ; deception,  stupe- 
faction, blows,  and  vodka.  And  before  a year  has  passed 
these  good,  intelligent,  healthy-minded  lads  will  be  as  bru- 
tal beings  as  their  instructors. 

“Come,  now,  suppose  your  father  were  arrested  and 
tried  to  make  his  escape  ?”  I asked  a young  soldier. 

“ I should  run  him  through  with  my  bayonet,”  he  an- 
swered with  the  foolish  intonation  peculiar  to  soldiers  ; 
“ and  if  he  made  off,  I ought  to  shoot  him,”  he  added,  ob- 
viously proud  of  knowing  what  he  must  do  if  his  father 
were  escaping. 

And  when  a good-hearted  lad  has  been  brought  to  a 
state  lower  than  that  of  a brute,  he  is  just  what  is  wanted 
by  those  who  use  him  as  an  instrument  of  violence.  He  is 
ready ; the  man  has  been  destroyed  and  a new  instrument 
of  violence  has  been  created.  And  all  this  is  done  every 
year,  every  autumn,  everywhere,  through  all  Russia  in  broad 
daylight  in  the  midst  of  large  towns,  where  all  may  see  it, 
and  the  deception  is  so  clever,  so  skillful,  that  though  all 
men  know  the  infamy  of  it  in  their  hearts,  and  see  all  its 
horrible  results,  they  cannot  throw  it  off  and  be  free. 

When  one’s  eyes  are  opened  to  this  awful  deception 
practiced  upon  us,  one  marvels  that  the  teachers  of  the 
Christian  religion  and  of  morals,  the  instructors  of  youth, 
or  even  the  good-hearted  and  intelligent  parents  who  are 
to  be  found  in  every  society,  can  teach  any  kind  of  moral- 
ity in  a society  in  which  it  is  openly  admitted  (it  is  so  ad- 
mitted, under  all  governments  and  all  churches)  that  mur- 
der and  torture  form  an  indispensable  element  in  the  life 
of  all,  and  that  there  must  always  be  special  men  trained  to 
kill  their  fellows,  and  that  any  one  of  us  may  have  to  be- 
come such  a trained  assassin. 

How  can  children,  youths,  and  people  generally  be 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


313 


taught  any  kind  of  morality — not  to  speak  of  teaching  in 
the  spirit  of  Christianity — side  by  side  with  the  doctrine 
that  murder  is  necessary  for  the  public  weal,  and  therefore 
legitimate,  and  that  there  are  men,  of  whom  each  of  us  may 
have  to  be  one,  whose  duty  is  to  murder  and  torture  and 
commit  all  sorts  of  crimes  at  the  will  of  those  who  are  in 
possession  of  authority.  If  this  is  so,  and  one  can  and 
ought  to  murder  and  torture,  there  is  not,  and  cannot  be, 
any  kind  of  moral  law,  but  only  the  law  that  might  is  right. 
And  this  is  just  how  it  is.  In  reality  that  is  the  doctrine — 
justified  to  some  by  the  theory  of  the  struggle  for  existence 
— which  reigns  in  our  society. 

And,  indeed,  what  sort  of  ethical  doctrine  could  admit 
the  legitimacy  of  murder  for  any  object  whatever  ? It  is 
as  impossible  as  a theory  of  mathematics  admitting  that 
two  is  equal  to  three. 

There  may  be  a semblance  of  mathematics  admitting 
that  two  is  equal  to  three,  but  there  can  be  no  real  science 
of  mathematics.  And  there  can  only  be  a semblance  of 
ethics  in  which  murder  in  the  shape  of  war  and  the  execu- 
tion of  criminals  is  allowed,  but  no  true  ethics.  The 
recognition  of  the  life  of  every  man  as  sacred  is  the  first 
and  only  basis  of  all  ethics. 

The  doctrine  of  an  eye  for  an  eye  and  a tooth  for  a 
tooth  has  been  abrogated  by  Christianity,  because  it  is  the 
justification  of  immorality,  and  a mere  semblance  of  equity, 
and  has  no  real  meaning.  Life  is  a value  which  has  no 
weight  nor  size,  and  cannot  be  compared  to  any  other,  and 
so  there  is  no  sense  in  destroying  a life  for  a life.  Be- 
sides, every  social  law  aims  at  the  amelioration  of  man’s  life. 
What  way,  then,  can  the  annihilation  of  the  life  of  some 
men  ameliorate  men’s  life?  Annihilation  of  life  cannot  be 
a means  of  the  amelioration  of  life  ; it  is  a suicidal 
act. 

To  destroy  another  life  for  the  sake  of  justice  is  as 


314 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


though  a man,  to  repair  the  misfortune  of  losing  one  arm, 
should  cut  off  the  other  arm  for  the  sake  of  equity. 

But  putting  aside  the  sin  of  deluding  men  into  regarding 
the  most  awful  crime  as  a duty,  putting  aside  the  revolting 
sin  of  using  the  name  and  authority  of  Christ  to  sanction 
what  he  most  condemned,  not  to  speak  of  the  curse  on 
those  who  cause  these  “ little  ones  ” to  offend — how  can 
people  who  cherish  their  own  way  of  life,  their  progress, 
even  from  the  point  of  view  of  their  personal  securit}^, 
allow  the  formation  in  their  midst  of  an  overwhelming 
force  as  senseless,  cruel,  and  destructive  as  every  govern- 
ment is  organized  on  the  basis  of  an  army  ? Even  the 
most  cruel  band  of  brigands  is  not  so  much  to  be  dreaded 
as  such  a government. 

The  power  of  every  brigand  chief  is  at  least  so  far 
limited  that  the  men  of  his  band  preserve  at  least  some 
human  liberty,  and  can  refuse  to  commit  acts  opposed  to 
their  conscience.  But,  owing  to  the  perfection  to  which 
the  discipline  of  the  army  has  been  brought,  there  is  no 
limit  to  check  men  who  form  part  of  a regularly  organized 
government.  There  are  no  crimes  so  revolting  that  they 
would  not  readily  be  committed  by  men  who  form  part  of 
a government  or  army,  at  the  will  of  anyone  (such  as  Bou- 
langer, Napoleon,  or  Pougachef)  who  may  chance  to  be  at 
their  head. 

Often  when  one  sees  conscription  levies,  military  drills 
and  maneuvers,  police  officers  with  loaded  revolvers,  and 
sentinels  at  their  posts  with  bayonets  on  their  rifles  ; when 
one  hears  for  whole  days  at  a time  (as  I hear  it  in  Hamov- 
niky  where  I live)  the  whistle  of  balls  and  the  dull  thud 
as  they  fall  in  the  sand  ; when  one  sees  in  the  midst  of  a 
town  where  any  effort  at  violence  in  self-defense  is  for- 
bidden, where  the  sale  of  powder  and  of  chemicals,  where 
furious  driving  and  practicing  as  a doctor  without  a di- 
ploma, and  so  on,  are  not  allowed,  thousands  of  disciplined 


IS  WITHIN'  YOU. 


315 


troops,  trained  to  murder,  and  subject  to  one  man’s  will ; 
one  asks  oneself  how  can  people  who  prize  their  security 
quietly  allow  it,  and  put  up  with  it  ? Apart  from  the 
immorality  and  evil  effects  of  it,  nothing  can  possibly  be 
more  unsafe.  What  are  people  thinking  about?  I don’t 
mean  now  Christians,  ministers  of  religion,  philanthropists, 
and  moralists,  but  simply  people  who  value  their  life,  their 
security,  and  their  comfort.  This  organization,  we  know, 
will  work  just  as  well  in  one  man’s  hands  as  another’s. 
To-day,  let  us  assume,  power  is  in  the  hands  of  a ruler 
who  can  be  endured,  but  to-morrow  it  may  be  seized  by  a 
Biron,  an  Elizabeth,  a Catherine,  a Pougachef,  a Napoleon 
I.,  or  a Napoleon  III. 

And  the  man  in  authority,  endurable  to-day,  may  become 
a brute  to-morrow,  or  may  be  succeeded  by  a mad  or  im- 
becile heir,  like  the  King  of  Bavaria  or  our  Paul  I. 

And  not  only  the  highest  authorities,  but  all  little  satraps 
scattered  over  everywhere,  like  so  many  General  Baranovs, 
governors,  police  officers  even,  and  commanders  of  com- 
panies, can  perpetrate  the  most  awful  crimes  before  there 
is  time  for  them  to  be  removed  from  office.  And  this  is 
what  is  constantly  happening. 

One  involuntarily  asks  how  can  men  let  it  go  on,  not 
from  higher  considerations  only,  but  from  regard  to  their 
own  safety  ? 

The  answer  to  this  question  is  that  it  is  not  all  people 
who  do  tolerate  it  (some — the  greater  proportion — deluded 
and  submissive,  have  no  choice  and  have  to  tolerate  an)^- 
thing).  It  is  tolerated  by  those  who  only  under  such  an 
organization  can  occupy  a position  of  profit.  They  tolerate 
it,  because  for  them  the  risks  of  suffering  from  a foolish  or 
cruel  man  being  at  the  head  of  the  government  or  the  army 
are  always  less  than  the  disadvantages  to  which  they  would 
be  exposed  by  the  destruction  of  the  organization  itself. 

A judge,  a commander  of  police,  a governor,  or  an  officer 


3i6 


“ the  kingdom  oe  god 


V 


\ 

vV 


will  keep  his  position  just  the  same  under  Boulanger  or  the 
republic,  under  Pougachef  or  Catherine.  He  will  lose  his 
profitable  position  for  certain,  if  the  existing  order  of  things 
which  secured  it  to  him  is  destroyed.  And  so  all  these 
people  feel  no  uneasiness  as  to  who  is  at.  the  head  of  the 
organization,  they  will  adapt  themselves  to  anyone  ; they 
only  dread  the  downfall  of  the  organization  itself,  and  that 
is  the  reason — though  often  an  unconscious  one — that  they 
support  it. 

One  often  wonders  why  independent  people,  who  are  not 
forced  to  do  so  in  any  way,  the  so-called  dite  of  society, 
should  go  into  the  army  in  Russia,  England,  Germany, 
Austria,  and  even  France,  and  seek  opportunities  of  be- 
coming  murderers.  Why  do  even  high-principled  parents 
send  their  boys  to  military  schools  ? Why  do  mothers 
buy  their  children  toy  helmets,  guns,  and  swords  as  play- 
things ? (The  peasant’s  children  never  play  at  soldiers, 
by  the  way).  Why  do  good  men  and  even  women,  who 
have  certainly  no  interest  in  war,  go  into  raptures  over 
the  various  exploits  of  Skobeloff  and  others,  and  vie  with 
one  another  in  glorifying  them  ? Why  do  men,  who  are 
not  obliged  to  do  so,  and  get  no  fee  for  it,  devote,  like  the 
marshals  of  nobility  in  Russia,  whole  months  of  toil  to 
a business  physically  disagreeable  and  morally  painful— 
the  enrolling  of  conscripts?  Why  do  all  kings  and 
emperors  wear  the  military  uniform  ? Why  do  they  all 
hold  military  reviews,  why  do  they  organize  maneuvers, 
distribute  rewards  to  the  military,  and  raise  monuments  to 
generals  and  successful  commanders  ? Why  do  rich  men 
of  independent  position  consider  it  an  honor  to  perform  a 


valet’s  duties  in  attendance  on  crowned  personages,  flatter- 
ing them  and  cringing  to  them  and  pretending  to  believe  in 
their  peculiar  superiority  ? Why  do  men  who  have  ceased 
to  believe  in  the  superstitions  of  the  mediseval  Church, 
and  who  could  not  possibly  believe  in  them  seriously  and 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


317 


consistently,  pretend  to  believe  in  and  give  their  support 
to  the  demoralizing  and  blasphemous  institution  of  the 
church?  Why  is  it  that  not  only  governments  but  private 
persons  of  the  higher  classes,  try  so  jealously  to  maintain 
the  ignorance  of  the  people  ? Why  do  they  fall  with  such 
fury  on  any  effort  at  breaking  down  religious  superstitions 
or  really  enlightening  the  people  ? Why  do  historians, 
novelists,  and  poets,  who  have  no  hope  of  gaining  anything 
by  their  flatteries,  make  heroes  of  kings,  emperors,  and  con- 
querors of  past  times  ? Why  do  men,  who  call  themselves 
learned,  dedicate  whole  lifetimes  to  making  theories  to 
prove  that  violence  employed  by  authority  against  the 
people  is  not  violence  at  all,  but  a special  right  ? One  often 
wonders  why  a fashionable  lady  or  an  artist,  who,  one 
would  think,  would  take  no  interest  in  political  or  military 
questions,  should  always  condemn  strikes  of  working  peo- 
ple, and  defend  war  ; and  should  always  be  found  without 
hesitation  opposed  to  the  one,  favorable  to  the  other. 

But  one  no  longer  wonders  when  one  realizes  that  in  the  j 
higher  classes  there  is  an  unerring  instinct  of  what  tends  / ' 
to  maintain  and  of  what  tends  to  destroy  the  organization^ 
by  virtue  of  which  they  enjoy  their  privilege^  The  fashion- 
able lady  had  certainly  not  reasoned  out  that  if  there  were 
no  capitalists  and  no  army  to  defend  them,  her  husband 
would  have  no  fortune,  and  she  could  not  have  her  enter- 
tainments and  her  ball-dresses.  And  the  artist  certainly 
does  not  argue  that  he  needs  the  capitalists  and  the  troop^ 
to  defend  them,  so  that  they  may  buy  his  pictures.  But  I 
instinct,  replacing  reason  in  this  instance,  guides  thetia.-A 
unerringly.  And  it  is  precisely  this  instinct  which  leads  all' 
men,  with  few  exceptions,  to  support  all  the  religious, 
political,  and  economic  institutions  which  are  to  their 
advantage. 

But  is  it  possible  that  the  higher  classes  support  the 
existing  order  of  things  simply  because  it  is  to  their 


3i8  the  kingdom  of  god 

advantage?  Cannot  they  see  that  this  order  of  things  is 
essentially  irrational,  that  it  is  no  longer  consistent  with  the 
stage  of  moral  development  attained  by  people,  and  with 
public  opinion,  and  that  it  is  fraught  with  perils  ? The 
governing  classes,  or  at  least  the  good,  honest,  and  intelli- 
gent people  of  them,  cannot  but  suffer  from  these  funda- 
mental inconsistencies,  and  see  the  dangers  with  which 
they  are  threatened.  And  is  it  possible  that  all  the  millions 
of  the  lower  classes  can  feel  easy  in  conscience  when  they 
commit  such  obviously  evil  deeds  as  torture  and  murder 
from  fear  of  punishment  ? Indeed,  it  could  not  be  so, 
neither  the  former  nor  the  latter  could  fail  to  see  the  irra- 
tionality of  their  conduct,  if  the  complexity  of  government 
organization  did  not  obscure  the  unnatural  senselessness  of 
their  actions. 

So  many  instigate,  assist,  or  sanction  the  commission  of 
every  one  of  these  actions  that  no  one  who  has  a hand  in 
them  feels  himself  morally  responsible  for  it. 

It  is  the  custom  among  assassins  to  oblige  all  the  wit- 
nesses of  a murder  to  strike  the  murdered  victim,  that  the 
responsibility  may  be  divided  among  as  large  a number  of 
people  as  possible.  The  same  principle  in  different  forms 
is  applied  under  the  government  organization  in  the  per- 
petration of  the  crimes,  without  which  no  government 
organization  could  exist.  Rulers  always  try  to  implicate 
as  many  citizens  as  possible  in  all  the  crimes  committed  in 
their  support. 

Of  late  this  tendency  has  been  expressed  in  a very 
obvious  manner  by  the  obligation  of  all  citizens  to  take 
part  in  legal  processes  as  jurors,  in  the  army  as  soldiers,  in 
the  local  government,  or  legislative  assembly,  as  electors  or 
members. 

Ju.st  as  in  a wicker  basket  all  the  ends  are  so  hidden 
away  that  it  is  hard  to  find  them,  in  the  state  organization 
the  responsibility  for  the  crimes  committed  is  so  hidden 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


319 


away  that  men  will  commit  the  most  atrocious  acts  without 
seeing  their  responsibility  for  them. 

In  ancient  times  tyrants  got  credit  for  the  crimes  they  I's 
committed,  but  in  our  day  the  most  atrocious  infamies,  in-  * / 
conceivable  under  the  Neros,  are  perpetrated  and  no  one 
gets  blamed  for  them. 

One  set  of  people  have  suggested,  another  set  have  pro- 
posed, a third  have  reported,  a fourth  have  decided,  a fifth 
have  confirmed,  a sixth  have  given  the  order,  and  a seventh 
set  of  men  have  carried  it  out.  They  hang,  they  flog  to 
death  women,  old  men,  and  innocent  people,  as  was  done 
recently  among  us  in  Russia  at  the  Yuzovsky  factory,  and 
is  always  being  done  everywhere  in  Europe  and  America  in 
the  struggle  with  the  anarchists  and  all  other  rebels  against 
the  existing  order  ; they  shoot  and  hang  men  by  hundreds 
and  thousands,  or  massacre  millions  in  war,  or  break  men’s 
hearts  in  solitary  confinement,  and  ruin  their  souls  in  the 
corruption  of  a soldier’s  life,  and  no  one  is  responsible. 

At  the  bottom  of  the  social  scale  soldiers,  armed  with 
guns,  pistols,  and  sabers,  injure  and  murder  people,  and 
compel  men  through  these  means  to  enter  the  army,  and  are 
absolutely  convinced  that  the  responsibility  for  the  actions 
rests  solely  on  the  officers  who  command  them. 

At  the  top  of  the  scale — the  Tzars,  presidents,  ministers, 
and  parliaments  decree  these  tortures  and  murders  and 
military  conscription,  and  are  fully  convinced  that  since  they 
are  either  placed  in  authority  by  the  grace  of  God  or  by 
the  society  they  govern,  which  demands  such  decrees  from 
them,  they  cannot  be  held  responsible.  Between  these  two 
extremes  are  the  intermediary  personages  who  superintend 
the  murders  and  other  acts  of  violence,  and  are  fully  con- 
vinced that  the  responsibility  is  taken  off  their  shoulders 
partly  by  their  superiors  who  have  given  the  order,  partly  by 
the  fact  that  such  orders  are  expected  from  them  by  all  who 
are  at  the  bottom  of  the  scale. 


320 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


The  authority  who  gives  the  orders  and  the  authority 
who  executes  them  at  the  two  extreme  ends  of  the  state 
organization,  meet  together  like  the  two  ends  of  a ring  ; 
they  support  and  rest  on  one  another  and  inclose  all  that 
lies  within  the  ring. 

Without  the  conviction  that  there  is  a person  or  persons 
who  will  take  the  whole  responsibility  of  his  acts,  not  one 
soldier  would  ever  lift  a hand  to  commit  a murder  or  other 
deed  of  violence. 

Without  the  conviction  that  it  is  expected  by  the  whole 
people  not  a single  king,  emperor,  president,  or  parliament 
would  order  murders  or  acts  of  violence. 

Without  the  conviction  that  there  are  persons  of  a higher 
grade  who  will  take  the  responsibility,  and  people  of  a 
lower  grade  who  require  such  acts  for  their  welfare,  not 
one  of  the  intermediate  class  would  superintend  such  deeds. 

The  state  is  so  organized  that  wherever  a man  is  placed 
in  the  social  scale,  his  irresponsibility  is  the  same.  The 
higher  his  grade  the  more  he  is  under  the  influence  of 
demands  from  below,  and  the  less  he  is  controlled  by  orders 
jrom  above,  and  vice  versa. 

All  men,  then,  bound  together  by  state  organization, 
throw  the  responsibility  of  their  acts  on  one  another,  the 
"peasant  soldier  on  the  nobleman  or  merchant  who  is  his 
officer,  and  the  officer  on  the  nobleman  who  has  been 
appointed  governor,  the  governor  on  the  nobleman  or 
son  of  an  official  who  is  minister,  the  minister  on  the 
member  of  the  royal  family  who  occupies  the  post  of 
Tzar,  and  the  Tzar  again  on  all  these  officials,  noblemen, 
merchants,  and  peasants.  But  that  is  not  all.  Besides  the 
fact  that  men  get  rid  of  the  sense  of  responsibility  for  their 
actions  in  this  way,  they  lose  their  moral  sense  of  responsi- 
bility also,  by  the  fact  that  in  forming  themselves  into 
a state  organization  they  persuade  themselves  and  each 
other  so  continually,  and  so  indefatigably,  that  they  are 


75  WITHIN  YOU." 


521 


not  all  equal,  but  “ as  the  stars  apart,”  that  they  come  to 
believe  it  genuinely  themselves.  Thus  some  are  per- 
suaded that  they  are  not  simple  people  like  everyone  else, 
but  special  people  who  are  to  be  specially  honored.  It  is 
instilled  into  another  set  of  men  by  every  possible  means 
that  they  are  inferior  to  others,  and  therefore  must  submit 
without  a murmur  to  every  order  given  them  by  their 
superiors. 

On  this  inequality,  above  all,  on  the  elevation  of  some 
and  the  degradation  of  others,  rests  the  capacity  men  have 
of  being  blind  to  the  insanity  of  the  existing  order  of  life, 
and  all  the  cruelty  and  criminality  of  the  deception  prac- 
ticed by  one  set  of  men  on  another. 

Those  in  whom  the  idea  has  been  instilled  that  they  are 
invested  with  a special  supernatural  grandeur  and  conse- 
quence, are  so  intoxicated  with  a sense  of  their  own  imag- 
inary dignity  that  they  cease  to  feel  their  responsibility  for 
what  they  do. 

While  those,  on  the  other  hand,  in  whom  the  idea  is 
fostered  that  they  are  inferior  animals,  bound  to  obey  their  k/ 
superiors  in  everything,  fall,  through  this  perpetual  humil- 
iation, into  a strange  condition  of  stupefied  servility,  and 
in  this  stupefied  state  do  not  see  the  significance  of  their 
actions  and  lose  all  consciousness  of  responsibility  for 
what  they  do. 

The  intermediate  class,  who  obey  the  orders  of  their 
superiors  on  the  one  hand  and  regard  themselves  as 
superior  beings  on  the  other,  are  intoxicated  by  power  and 
stupefied  by  servility  at  the  same  time  and  so  lose  the 
sense  of  their  responsibility. 

One  need  only  glance  during  a review  at  the  commander- 
in-chief,  intoxicated  with  self-importance,  followed  by  his 
retinue,  all  on  magnificent  and  gayly  appareled  horses,  in 
splendid  uniforms  and  wearing  decorations,  and  see  how 
they  ride  to  the  harmonious  and  solemn  strains  of  music 


322 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


belore  the  ranks  of  soldiers,  all  presenting  arms  and  petri- 
fied with  servility.  One  need  only  glance  at  this  spectacle 
to  understand  that  at  such  moments,  when  they  are  in  a 
state  of  the  most  complete  intoxication,  commander-in- 
chief, soldiers,  and  intermediate  officers  alike,  would  be 
capable  of  committing  crimes  of  which  they  would  never 
dream  under  other  conditions. 

The  intoxication  produced  by  such  stimulants  as  parades, 
reviews,  religious  solemnities,  and  coronations,  is,  however, 
an  acute  and  temporary  condition  ; but  there  are  other 
forms  of  chronic,  permanent  intoxication,  to  which  those 
are  liable  who  have  any  kind  of  authority,  from  that  of  the 
Tzar  to  that  of  the  lowest  police  officer  at  the  street  corner, 
and  also  those  who  are  in  subjection  to  authority  and  in  a 
state  of  stupefied  servility.  The  latter,  like  all  slaves, 
always  find  a justification  for  their  own  servility,  in  ascrib- 
ing the  greatest  possible  dignity  and  importance  to  those 
they  serve. 

It  is  principally  through  this  false  idea  of  inequality,  and 
the  intoxication  of  power  and  of  servility  resulting  from  it, 
that  men  associated  in  a state  organization  are  enabled  to 
commit  acts  opposed  to  their  conscience  without  the  least 
scruple  or  remorse. 

Under  the  influence  of  this  intoxication,  men  imagine 
themselves  no  longer  simply  men  as  they  are,  but  some 
special  beings — noblemen,  merchants,  governors,  judges, 
officers,  tzars,  ministers,  or  soldiers — no  longer  bound  by 
ordinary  human  duties,  but  by  other  duties  far  more 
weighty — the  peculiar  duties  of  a nobleman,  merchant, 
governor,  judge,  officer,  tzar,  minister,  or  soldier. 

Thus  the  landowner,  who  claimed  the  forest,  acted  as  he 
did  only  because  he  fancied  himself  not  a simple  man,  hav- 
ing the  same  rights  to  life  as  the  peasants  living  beside 
him  and  everyone  else,  but  a great  landowner,  a member 
of  the  nobility,  and  under  the  influence  of  the  intoxication 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


323 

of  power  he  felt  his  dignity  offended  by  the  peasants’  claims. 
It  was  only  through  this  feeling  that,  without  considering 
the  consequences  that  might  follow,  he  sent  in  a claim  to 
be  reinstated  in  his  pretended  rights. 

In  the  same  way  the  judges,  who  wrongfully  adjudged 
the  forest  to  the  proprietor,  did  so  simply  because  they 
fancied  themselves  not  simply  men  like  everyone  else,  and 
so  bound  to  be  guided  in  everything  only  by  what  they 
consider  right,  but,  under  the  intoxicating  influence  of 
power,  imagined  themselves  the  representatives  of  the 
justice  which  cannot  err  ; while  under  the  intoxicating 
influence  of  servility  they  imagined  themselves  bound  to 
carry  out  to  the  letter  the  instructions  inscribed  in  a certain 
book,  the  so-called  law.  In  the  same  way  all  who  take 
part  in  such  an  affair,  from  the  highest  representative  of 
authority  who  signs  his  assent  to  the  report,  from  the 
superintendent  presiding  at  the  recruiting  sessions,  and 
the  priest  who  deludes  the  recruits,  to  the  lowest  soldier 
who  is  ready  now  to  fire  on  his  own  brothers,  imagine,  in 
the  intoxication  of  power  or  of  servility,  that  they  are 
some  conventional  characters.  They  do  not  face  the  ques- 
tion that  is  presented  to  them,  whether  or  not  they  ought 
to  take  part  in  what  their  conscience  judges  an  evil  act, 
but  fancy  themselves  various  conventional  personages — 
one  as  the  Tzar,  God’s  anointed,  an  exceptional  being, 
called  to  watch  over  the  happiness  of  one  hundred  millions 
of  men  ; another  as  the  representative  of  nobility  ; another 
as  a priest,  who  has  received  special  grace  by  his  ordination  ; 
another  as  a soldier,  bound  by  his  military  oath  to  carry 
out  all  he  is  commanded  without  reflection. 

Only  under  the  intoxication  of  the  power  or  the  servility 
of  their  imagined  positions  could  all  these  people  act  as 
they  do. 

Were  not  they  all  firmly  convinced  that  their  respective 
vocations  of  tzar,  minister,  governor,  judge,  nobleman. 


324 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


i t 


landowner,  superintendent,  officer,  and  soldier  are  some- 
thing real  and  important,  not  one  of  them  would  even  think 
without  horror  and  aversion  of  taking  part  in  what  they 
do  now. 

The  conventional  positions,  established  hundreds  of 
years,  recognized  for  centuries  and  by  everyone,  distin- 
guished by  special  names  and  dresses,  and,  moreover,  con- 
firmed by  every  kind  of  solemnity,  have  so  penetrated  into 
men’s  minds  through  their  senses,  that,  forgetting  the 
ordinary  conditions  of  life  common  to  all,  they  look  at 
themselves  and  everyone  only  from  this  conventional  point 
of  view,  and  are  guided  in  their  estimation  of  their  own 
actions  and  those  of  others  by  this  conventional  standard. 

Thus  we  see  a man  of  perfect  sanity  and  ripe  age,  simply 
because  he  is  decked  out  with  some  fringe,  or  embroidered 
keys  on  his  coat  tails,  or  a colored  ribbon  only  fit  for  some 
gayly  dressed  girl,  and  is  told  that  he  is  a general,  a 
chamberlain,  a knight  of  the  order  of  St.  Andrew,  or  some 
similar  nonsense,  suddenly  become  self-important,  proud, 
and  even  happy,  or,  on  the  contrary,  grow  melancholy  and 
unhappy  to  the  point  of  falling  ill,  because  he  has  failed  to 
obtain  the  expected  decoration  or  title.  Or  what  is  still 
more  striking,  a young  man,  perfectly  sane  in  every  other 
matter,  independent  and  beyond  the  fear  of  want,  simply 
because  he  has  been  appointed  judicial  prosecutor  or  dis- 
trict commander,  separates  a poor  widow  from  her  little 
children,  and  shuts  her  up  in  prison,  leaving  her  children 
uncared  for,  all  because  the  unhappy  woman  carried  on 
a secret  trade  in  spirits,  and  so  deprived  the  revenue  of 
twenty-five  rubles,  and  he  does  not  feel  the  least  pang  of 
remorse.  Or  what  is  still  more  amazing  ; a man,  other- 
wise sensible  and  good-hearted,  simply  because  he  is  given 
a badge  or  a uniform  to  wear,  and  told  that  he  is  a guard 
or  customs  officer,  is  ready  to  fire  on  people,  and  neither 
he  nor  those  around  him  regard  him  as  to  blame  for  it,  but. 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


325 


on  the  contrary,  would  regard  him  as  to  blame  if  he  did 
not  fire.  To  say  nothing  of  judges  and  juries  who  con- 
demn men  to  death,  and  soldiers  who  kill  men  by  thousands 
without  the  slightest  scruple  merely  because  it  has  been 
instilled  into  them  that  they  are  not  simply  men,  but 
jurors,  judges,  generals,  and  soldiers. 

This  strange  and  abnormal  condition  of  men  under  state 
organization  is  usually  expressed  in  the  following  words  : 
“As  a man,  I pity  him;  but  as  guard,  judge,  general, 
governor,  tzar,  or  soldier,  it  is  my  duty  to  kill  or  torture 
him.”  Just  as  though  there  were  some  positions  conferred 
and  recognized,  which  would  exonerate  us  from  the  obliga- 
tions laid  on  each  of  us  by  the  fact  of  our  common 
humanity. 

So,  for  example,  in  the  case  before  us,  men  are  going  to 
murder  and  torture  the  famishing,  and  they  admit  that  in 
the  dispute  between  the  peasants  and  the  landowner  the 
peasants  are  right  (all  those  in  command  said  as  much 
to  me).  They  know  that  the  peasants  are  wretched, 
poor,  and  hungry,  and  the  landowner  is  rich  and  inspires 
no  sympathy.  Yet  they  are  all  going  to  kill  the  peasants 
to  secure  three  thousand  rubles  for  the  landowner,  only 
because  at  that  moment  they  fancy  themselves  not  men  but 
governor,  official,  general  of  police,  officer,  and  soldier, 
respectively,  and  consider  themselves  bound  to  obey,  not 
the  eternal  demands  of  the  conscience  of  man,  but  the 
casual,  temporary  demands  of  their  positions  as  officers  or 
soldiers. 


Strange  as  it  may  seem,  the  sole  explanation  of  this 
astonishing  phenomenon  is  that  they  are  in  the  condition 
of  the  hypnotized,  who,  they  say,  feel  and  act  like  the- 
creatures  they  are  commanded  by  the  hypnotizer  to  repre- 
sent. When,  for  instance,  it  is  suggested  to  the  hypnotized 
subject  that  he  is  lame,  he  begins  to  walk  lame,  that  he  is 
blind,  and  he  cannot  see,  that  he  is  a wild  beast,  and  he 


326 


THE  KnWGDOM  OF  COD 


begins  to  bite.  This  is  the  state,  not  only  of  those  who 
were  going  on  this  expedition,  but  of  all  men  who  fulfill 
their  state  and  social  duties  in  preference  to  and  in  detri- 
ment of  their  human  duties. 

The  essence  of  this  state  is  that  under  the  influence  of 
one  suggestion  they  lose  the  power  of  criticising  their 
actions,  and  therefore  do,  without  thinking,  everything  con- 
sistent with  the  suggestion  to  which  they  are  led  by 
example,  precept,  or  insinuation. 

The  difference  between  those  hypnotized  by  scientific 
men  and  those  under  the  influence  of  the^state  hypnotism, 
is  that  an  imaginary  position  is  suggested  to  the  former 
suddenly  by  one  person  in  a very  brief  space  of  time,  and 
so  the  hypnotized  state  appears  to  us  in  a striking  and 
surprising  form,  while  the  imaginary  position  suggested  by 
state  influence  is  induced  slowly,  little  by  little,  impercep- 
tibly from  childhood,  sometimes  during  years,  or  even 
generations,  and  not  in  one  person  alone  but  in  a whole 
society. 

“ But,”  it  will  be  said,  “at  all  times,  in  all  societies,  the 
majority  of  persons — all  the  children,  all  the  women 
absorbed  in  the  bearing  and  rearing  of  the  young,  all  the 
great  mass  of  the  laboring  population,  who  are  under  the 
necessity  of  incessant  and  fatiguing  physical  labor,  all  those 
of  weak  character  by  nature,  all  those  who  are  abnormally 
enfeebled  intellectually  by  the  effects  of  nicotine,  alcohol, 
opium,  or  other  intoxicants — are  always  in  a condition  of 
incapacity  for  independent  thought,  and  are  either  in  sub- 
jection to  those  who  are  on  a higher  intellectual  level,  or 
else  under  the  influence  of  family  or  social  traditions,  of 
what  is  called  public  opinion,  and  there  is  nothing  unnatural 
or  incongruous  in  their  subjection.” 

And  truly  there  is  nothing  unnatural  in  it,  and  the  tend- 
ency of  men  of  small  intellectual  power  to  follow  the  lead 
of  those  on  a higher  level  of  intelligence  is  a constant  law. 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


327 


and  it  is  owing  to  it  that  men  can  live  in  societies  and  on 
the  same  principles  at  all.  The  minority  consciously  adopt 
certain  rational  principles  through  their  correspondence 
with  reason,  while  the  majority  act  on  the  same  principles 
unconsciously  because  it  is  required  by  public  opinion. 

Such  subjection  to  public  opinion  on  the  part  of  the 
unintellectual  does  not  assume  an  unnatural  character  till 
the  public  opinion  is  split  into  two. 

But  there  are  times  when  a higher  truth,  revealed  at  first 
to  a few  persons,  gradually  gains  ground  till  it  has  taken 
hold  of  such  a number  of  persons  that  the  old  public 
opinion,  founded  on  a lower  order  of  truths,  begins  to  totter 
and  the  new  is  ready  to  take  its  place,  but  has  not  yet  been 
firmly  established.  It  is  like  the  spring,  this  time  of  tran- 
sition, when  the  old  order  of  ideas  has  not  quite  broken  up 
and  the  new  has  not  quite  gained  a footing.  Men  begin  to 
criticise  their  actions  in  the  light  of  the  new  truth,  but  in 
the  meantime  in  practice,  through  inertia  and  tradition, 
they  continue  to  follow  the  principles  which  once  represented 
the  highest  point  of  rational  consciousness,  but  are  now  in 
flagrant  contradiction  with  it. 

Then  men  are  in  an  abnormal,  wavering  condition, 
feeling  the  necessity  of  following  the  new  ideal,  and 
yet  not  bold  enough  to  break  with  the  old-established 
traditions. 

Such  is  the  attitude  in  regard  to  the  truth  of  Christian- 
ity not  only  of  the  men  in  the  Toula  train,  but  of  the 
majority  of  men  of  our  times,  alike  of  the  higher  and  the 
lower  orders. 

Those  of  the  ruling  classes,  having  no  longer  any  reason- 
able justification  for  the  profitable  positions  they  occupy, 
are  forced,  in  order  to  keep  them,  to  stifle  their  higher 
rational  faculty  of  loving,  and  to  persuade  themselves  that 
their  positions  are  indispensable.  And  those  of  the  lower 
classes,  exhausted  by  toil  and  brutalized  of  set  purpose,  are 


328 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


kept  in  a permanent  deception,  practiced  deliberately  and 
continuously  by  the  higher  classes  upon  them. 

Only  in  this  way  can  one  explain  the  amazing  contradic- 
tions with  which  our  life  is  full,  and  of  which  a striking 
example  was  presented  to  me  by  the  expedition  I met  on 
the  9th  of  September  ; good,  peaceful  men,  known  to  me 
personally,  going  with  untroubled  tranquillity  to  perpetrate 
the  most  beastly,  senseless,  and  vile  of  crimes.  Had  not 
they  some  means  of  stifling  their  conscience,  not  one  of 
them  would  be  capable  of  committing  a hundredth  part  of 
such  a villainy. 

It  is  not  that  they  have  not  a conscience  which  forbids 
them  from  acting  thus,  just  as,  even  three  or  four  hundred 
years  ago,  when  people  burnt  men  at  the  stake  and  put 
them  to  the  rack  they  had  a conscience  which  prohibited 
it ; the  conscience  is  there,  but  it  has  been  put  to  sleep — in 
those  in  command  by  what  the  psychologists  call  auto-sug- 
gestion ; in  the  soldiers,  by  the  direct  conscious  hypnotiz- 
ing exerted  by  the  higher  classes. 

Though  asleep,  the  conscience  is  there,  and  in  spite  of 
the  hypnotism  it  is  already  speaking  in  them,  and  it  may 
-awake. 

All  these  men  are  in  a position  like  that  of  a man  under 
hypnotism,  commanded  to  do  something  opposed  to  every- 
thing he  regards  as  good  and  rational,  such  as  to  kill  his 
mother  or  his  child.  The  hypnotized  subject  feels  himself 
bound  to  carry  out  the  suggestion — he  thinks  he  cannot 
stop — but  the  nearer  he  gets  to  the  time  and  the  place  of 
the  action,  the  more  the  benumbed  conscience  begins  to 
stir,  to  resist,  and  to  try  to  awake.  And  no  one  can  say 
beforehand  whether  he  will  carry  out  the  suggestion  or 
not  ; which  will  gain  the  upper  hand,  the  rational  conscience 
or  the  irrational  suggestion.  It  all  depends  on  their  rela- 
tive strength. 

That  is  just  the  case  with  the  men  in  the  Toula  train  and 


/S  WITHIN  YOU. 


329 


in  general  with  everyone  carrying  out  acts  of  state  violence 
in  our  day.  — 

There  was  a time  when  men  who  set  out  with  the  object  of 
murder  and  violence,  to  make  an  example,  did  not  return 
till  they  had  carried  out  their  object,  and  then,  untroubled 
by  doubts  or  scruples,  having  calmly  flogged  men  to  death, 
they  returned  home  and  caressed  their  children,  laughed, 
amused  themselves,  and  enjoyed  the  peaceful  pleasures  of 
family  life.  In  those  days  it  never  struck  the  landowners 
and  wealthy  men  who  profited  by  these  crimes,  that  the 
privileges  they  enjoyed  had  any  direct  connection  with 
these  atrocities.  But  now  it  is  no  longer  so.  Men  know 
now,  or  are  not  far  from  knowing,  what  they  are  doing  and 
for  what  object  they  do  it.  They  can  shut  their  eyes  and 
force  their  conscience  to  be  still,  but  so  long  as  .their  eyes 
are  opened  and  their  conscience  undulled^  they  must  all 
— those  who  carry  out  and  those  who  profit  by  these  crimes 
alike — see  the  import  of  them.  Sometimes  they  realize  it 
only  after  the  crime  has  been  perpetrated,  sometimes  they 
realize  it  just  before  its  perpetration.  Thus  those  who  com- 
manded the  recent  acts  of  violence  in  Nijni-Novgorod, 
Saratov,  Orel,  and  the  Yuzovsky  factory  realized  their  sig- 
nificance only  after  their  perpetration,  and  now  those  who 
commanded  and  those  who  carried  out  these  crimes  are 
ashamed  before  public  opinion  and  their  conscience.  I 
have  talked  to  soldiers  who  had  taken  part  in  these  crimes, 
and  they  always  studiously  turned  the  conversation  off  the 
subject,  and  when  they  spoke  of  it  it  was  with  horror  and 
bewilderment.  There  are  cases,  too,  when  men  come  to 
themselves  just  before  the  perpetration  of  the  crime.  Thus 
I know  the  case  of  a sergeant-major  who  had  been  beaten 
by  two  peasants  during  the  repression  of  disorder  and  had 
made  a complaint.  The  next  day,  after  seeing  the  atroci- 
ties perpetrated  on  the  other  peasants,  he  entreated  the 
commander  of  his  company  to  tear  up  his  complaint  and 


“ TflE  KINGDOM  OP  GOD 


33^ 

let  off  the  two  peasants.  I know  cases  when  soldiers,  com- 
manded to  fire,  have  refused  to  obey,  and  I know  many 
cases  of  officers  who  have  refused  to  command  expeditions 
for  torture  and  murder.  So  that  men  sometimes  come  to 
their  senses  long  before  perpetrating  the  suggested  crime, 
sometimes  at  the  very  moment  before  perpetrating  it, 
sometimes  only  afterward. 

The  men  traveling  in  the  Toula  train  were  going  with 
the  object  of  killing  and  injuring  their  fellow-creatures,  but 
none  could  tell  whether  they  would  carry  out  their  object 
or  not.  However  obscure  his  responsibility  for  the  affair 
is  to  each,  and  however  strong  the  idea  instilled  into  all  of 
them  that  they  are  not  men,  but  governors,  officials,  officers, 
and  soldiers,  and  as  such  beings  can  violate  every  human 
duty,  the  nearer  they  approach  the  place  of  the  execution,  the 
stronger  their  doubts  as  to  its  being  right,  and  this  doubt 
will  reach  its  highest  point  when  the  very  moment  for 
carrying  it  out  has  come. 

The  governor,  in  spite  of  all  the  stupefying  effect  of  his 
surroundings,  cannot  help  hesitating  when  the  moment 
comes  to  give  final  decisive  command.  He  knows  that  the 
action  of  the  Governor  of  Orel  has  called  down  upon  him 
the  disapproval  of  the  best  people,  and  he  himself,  influ- 
enced by  the  public  opinion  of  the  circles  in  which  he 
moves,  has  more  than  once  expressed  his  disapprobation  of 
him.  He  knows  that  the  prosecutor,  who  ought  to  have 
come,  flatly  refused  to  have  anything  to  do  with  it,  because 
he  regarded  it  as  disgraceful.  He  knows,  too,  that  there 
may  be  changes  any  day  in  the  government,  and  that  what 
was  a ground  for  advancement  yesterday  may  be  the  cause 
of  disgrace  to-morrow.  And  he  knows  that  there  is  a 
press,  if  not  in  Russia,  at  least  abroad,  which  may  report 
the  affair  and  cover  him  with  ignominy  forever.  He  is 
already  conscious  of  a change  in  public  opinion  which  con- 
demns what  was  formerly  a duty.  Moreover,  he  cannot 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


331 


feel  fully  assured  that  his  soldiers  will  at  the  last  moment 
obey  him.  He  is  wavering,  and  none  can  say  beforehand 
what  he  will  do. 

All  the  officers  and  functionaries  who  accompany  him 
experience  in  greater  or  less  degree  the  same  emotions. 
In  the  depths  of  their  hearts  they  all  know  that  what  they 
are  doing  is  shameful,  that  to  take  part  in  it  is  a discredit 
and  blemish  in  the  eyes  of  some  people  whose  opinion  they 
value.  They  know  that  after  murdering  and  torturing  the 
defenseless,  each  of  them  will  be  ashamed  to  face  his 
betrothed  or  the  woman  he  is  courting.  And  besides,  they 
too,  like  the  governor,  are  doubtful  whether  the  soldiers’ 
obedience  to  orders  can  be  reckoned  on.  What  a con- 
trast with  the  confident  air  they  all  put  on  as  they  sauntered 
about  the  station  and  platform  ! Inwardly  they  were  not 
only  in  a state  of  suffering  but  even  of  suspense.  Indeed 
they  only  assumed  this  bold  and  composed  manner  to  con- 
ceal the  wavering  within.  And  this  feeling  increased  as 
they  drew  near  the  scene  of  action. 

And  imperceptible  as  it  was,  and  strange  as  it  seems  to 
say  so,  all  that  mass  of  lads,  the  soldiers,  who  seemed  so 
submissive,  were  in  precisely  the  same  condition. 

These  are  not  the  soldiers  of  former  days,  who  gave  up 
the  natural  life  of  industry  and  devoted  their  whole  exist- 
ence to  debauchery,  plunder,  and  murder,  like  the  Roman 
legionaries  or  the  warriors  of  the  Thirty  Years’ War,  or 
even  the  soldiers  of  more  recent  times  who  served  for 
twenty-five  years  in  the  army.  They  have  mostly  been 
only  lately  taken  from  their  families,  and  are  full  of  the 
recollections  of  the  good,  rational,  natural  life  they  have 
left  behind  them. 

All  these  lads,  peasants  for  the  most  part,  know  what  is 
the  business  they  have  come  about  ; they  know  that  the 
landowners  always  oppress  their  brothers  the  peasants,  and 
that  therefore  it  is  most  likely  the  same  thing  here.  More- 


332 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


over,  a majority  of  them  can  now  read,  and  the  books  they 
read  are  not  all  such  as  exalt  a military  life  ; there  are 
some  which  point  out  its  immorality.  Among  them  are 
often  free-thinking  comrades — who  have  enlisted  volun- 
tarily— or  young  officers  of  liberal  ideas,  and  already  the 
first  germ  of  doubt  has  been  sown  in  regard  to  the  uncon- 
ditional legitimacy  and  glory  of  their  occupation. 

It  is  true  that  they  have  all  passed  through  that  terrible, 
skillful  education,  elaborated  through  centuries,  which  kills 
all  initiative  in  a man,  and  that  they  are  so  trained  to  me- 
chanical obedience  that  at  the  word  of  command  : “ Fire  ! 
— All  the  line  ! — Fire  ! ” and  so  on,  their  guns  will  rise  of 
themselves  and  the  habitual  movements  will  be  performed. 
But  “ Fire  ! ” now  does  not  mean  shooting  into  the  sand 
for  amusement,  it  means  firing  on  their  broken-down,  ex- 
ploited fathers  and  brothers  whom  they  see  there  in  the 
crowd,  with  women  and  children  shouting  and  waving  their 
arms.  Here  they  are — one  with  his  scanty  beard  and 
patched  coat  and  plaited  shoes  of  reed,  just  like  the  father 
left  at  home  in  Kazan  or  Riazan  province  ; one  with  gray 
beard  and  bent  back,  leaning  on  a staff  like  the  old  grand- 
father ; one,  a young  fellow  in  boots  and  a red  shirt,  just 
as  he  was  himself  a year  ago — he,  the  soldier  who  must 
fire  upon  him.  There,  too,  a woman  in  reed  shoes  and 
panyova,  just  like  the  mother  left  at  home. 

Is  it  possible  they  must  fire  on  them  ? And  no  one 
knows  what  each  soldier  will  do  at  the  last  minute.  The 
least  word,  the  slightest  allusion  would  be  enough  to  stop 
them. 

At  the  last  moment  they  will  all  find  themselves  in  the 
position  of  a hypnotized  man  to  whom  it  has  been  suggested 
to  chop  a log,  who  coming  up  to  what  has  been  indicated 
to  him  as  a log,  with  the  ax  already  lifted  to  strike,  sees 
that  it  is  not  a log  but  his  sleeping  brother.  He  may  per- 
form the  act  that  has  been  suggested  to  him,  and  he  may 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


333 


come  to  his  senses  at  the  moment  of  performing  it.  In  the 
same  way  all  these  men  may  come  to  themselves  in  time  or 
they  may  go  on  to  the  end. 

If  they  do  not  come  to  themselves,  the  most  fearful 
crime  will  be  committed,  as  in  Orel,  and  then  the  hypnotic 
suggestion  under  which  they  act  will  be  strengthened  in  all 
other  men.  If  they  do  come  to  themselves,  not  only  this  ter- 
rible crime  will  not  be  perpetrated,  but  many  also  who  hear  of 
the  turn  the  affair  lias  taken  will  be  emancipated  from  the 
hypnotic  influence  in  which  they  were  held,  or  at  least  will 
be  nearer  being  emancipated  from  it. 

Even  if  a few  only  come  to  themselves,  and  boldly  ex- 
plain to  the  others  all  the  wickedness  of  such  a crime,  the 
influence  of  these  few  may  rouse  the  others  to  shake  off 
the  controlling  suggestion,  and  the  atrocity  will  not  be 
perpetrated. 

More  than  that,  if  a few  men,  even  of  those  who  are  not 
taking  part  in  the  affair  but  are  only  present  at  the  prepara- 
tions for  it,  or  have  heard  of  such  things  being  done  in  the 
past,  do  not  remain  indifferent  but  boldly  and  plainly  ex- 
press their  detestation  of  such  crimes  to  those  who  have  to 
execute  them,  and  point  out  to  them  all  the  senselessness, 
cruelty,  and  wickedness  of  such  acts,  that  alone  will  be 
productive  of  good. 

That  was  what  took  place  in  the  instance  before  us.  It 
was  enough  for  a few  men,  some  personally  concerned  in 
the  affair  and  others  simply  outsiders,  to  express  their  dis- 
approval of  floggings  that  had  taken  place  elsewhere,  and 
their  contempt  and  loathing  for  those  who  had  taken  part 
in  inflicting  them,  for  a few  persons  in  the  Toula  case  to 
express  their  repugnance  to  having  any  share  in  it ; for  a 
lady  traveling  by  the  train,  and  a few  other  bystanders  at 
the  station,  to  express  to  those  who  formed  the  expedition 
their  disgust  at  what  they  were  doing ; for  one  of  the  com- 
manders of  a company,  who  was  asked  for  troops  for  the 


334 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


restoration  of  order,  to  reply  that  soldiers  ought  not  to  be 
butchers — and  thanks  to  these  and  a few  other  seemingly 
insignificant  influences  brought  to  bear  on  these  hypnotized 
men,  the  affair  took  a completely  different  turn,  and  the 
troops,  when  they  reached  the  place,  did  not  inflict  any 
punishment,  but  contented  themselves  with  cutting  down 
the  forest  and  giving  it  to  the  landowner. 

Had  not  a few  persons  had  a clear  consciousness  that 
what  they  were  doing  was  wrong,  and  consequently  influ- 
enced one  another  in  that  direction,  what  was  done  at  Orel 
would  have  taken  place  at  Toula.  Had  this  consciousness 
been  still  stronger,  and  had  the  influence  exerted  been 
therefore  greater  than  it  was,  it  might  well  have  been  that 
the  governor  with  his  troops  would  not  even  have  ventured 
to  cut  down  the  forest  and  give  it  to  the  landowner.  Had 
that  consciousness  been  stronger  still,  it  might  well  have 
been  that  the  governor  would  not  have  ventured  to  go  to 
the  scene  of  action  at  all ; even  that  the  minister  would 
not  have  ventured  to  form  this  decision  or  the  Tzar  to 
ratify  it. 

All  depends,  therefore,  on  the  strength  of  the  conscious- 
ness of  Christian  truth  on  the  part  of  each  individual  man. 

And,  therefore,  one  would  have  thought  that  the  efforts 
of  all  men  of  the  present  day  who  profess  to  wish  to  work 
for  the  welfare  of  humanity  would  have  been  directed  to 
strengthening  this  consciousness  of  Christian  truth  in  them- 
selves and  others. 

But,  strange  to  say,  it  is  precisely  those  people  who  pro- 
fess most  anxiety  for  the  amelioration  of  human  life,  and  are 
regarded  as  the  leaders  of  public  opinion,  who  assert  that 
there  is  no  need  to  do  that,  and  that  there  are  other  more 
effective  means  for  the  amelioration  of  men’s  condition. 
They  affirm  that  the  amelioration  of  human  life  is  effected 
not  by  the  efforts  of  individual  men,  to  recognize  and  prop- 
agate the  truth,  but  by  the  gradual  modification  of  the 


IS  IF/THIM  YOU. 


335 


general  conditions  of  life,  and  that  therefore  the  efforts  of 
individuals  should  be  directed  to  the  gradual  modification 
of  external  conditions  for  the  better.  For  every  advocacy 
of  a truth  inconsistent  with  the  existing  order  by  an  indi- 
vidual is,  they  maintain,  not  only  useless  but  injurious, 
since  in  provokes  coercive  measures  on  the  part  of  the 
authorities,  restricting  these  individuals  from  continuing 
any  action  useful  to  society.  According  to  this  doctrine 
all  modifications  in  human  life  are  brought  about  by  pre- 
cisely the  same  laws  as  in  the  life  of  the  animals. 

So  that,  according  to  this  doctrine,  all  the  founders  of 
religions,  such  as  Moses  and  the  prophets,  Confucius,  Lao- 
Tse,  Buddha,  Christ,  and  others,  preached  their  doctrines 
and  their  followers  accepted  them,  not  because  they  loved 
the  truth,  but  because  the  political,  social,  and  above  all 
economic  conditions  of  the  peoples  among  whom  these 
religions  arose  were  favorable  for  their  origination  and 
development. 

And  therefore  the  chief  efforts  of  the  man  who  wishes  to 
serve  society  and  improve  the  condition  of  humanity  ought, 
according  to  this  doctrine,  to  be  directed  not  to  the  elucida- 
tion and  propagation  of  truth,  but  to  the  improvement  of 
the  external  political,  social,  and  above  all  economic  condi- 
tions. And  the  modification  of  these  conditions  is  partly 
effected  by  serving  the  government  and  introducing  liberal 
and  progressive  principles  into  it,  partly  in  promoting  the 
development  of  industry  and  the  propagation  of  socialistic 
ideas,  and  most  of  all  by  the  diffusion  of  science.  Accord- 
ing to  this  theory  it  is  of  no  consequence  whether  you  pro- 
fess the  truth  revealed  to  you,  and  therefore  realize  it  in 
your  life,  or  at  least  refrain  from  committing  actions  opposed 
to  the  truth,  such  as  serving  the  government  and  strength- 
ening its  authority  when  you  regard  it  as  injurious,  profit- 
ing by  the  capitalistic  system  when  you  regard  it  as  wrong, 
showing  veneration  for  various  ceremonies  which  you 


33^ 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


believe  to  be  degrading  superstitions,  giving  support  to  the 
law  when  you  believe  it  to  be  founded  on  error,  serving  as 
a soldier,  taking  oaths,  and  lying,  and  lowering  yourself 
generally.  It  is  useless  to  refrain  from  all  that ; what  is  of 
use  is  not  altering  the  existing  forms  of  life,  but  submitting 
to  them  against  your  own  convictions,  introducing  liberal- 
ism into  the  existing  institutions,  promoting  commerce,  the 
propaganda  of  socialism,  and  the  triumphs  of  what  is  called 
science,  and  the  diffusion  of  education.  According  to  this 
theory  one  can  remain  a landowner,  merchant,  manufac- 
turer, judge,  official  in  government  pa}'-,  officer  or  soldier, 
and  still  be  not  only  a humane  man,  but  even  a socialist  and 
revolutionist. 

Hypocrisy,  which  had  formerly  only  a religious  basis  in 
the  doctrine  of  original  sin,  the  redemption,  and  the  Church, 
has  in  our  day  gained  a new  scientific  basis  and  has  con- 
sequently caught  in  its  nets  all  those  who  had  reached 
too  high  a stage  of  development  to  be  able  to  find  support 
in  religious  hypocrisy.  So  that  while  in  former  days  a man 
who  professed  the  religion  of  the  Church  could  take  part  in 
all  the  crimes  of  the  state,  and  profit  by  them,  and  still 
regard  himself  as  free  from  any  taint  of  sin,  so  long  as  he 
fulfilled  the  external  observances  of  his  creed,  nowadays  all 
who  do  not  believe  in  the  Christianity  of  the  Church,  find 
similar  well-founded  irrefutable  reasons  in  science  for 
regarding  themselves  as  blameless  and  even  highly  moral 
in  spite  of  their  participation  in  the  misdeeds  of  govern- 
ment and  the  advantages  they  gain  from  them. 

A rich  landowner — not  only  in  Russia,  but  in  France, 
England,  Germany,  or  America — lives  on  the  rents  exacted 
from  the  people  living  on  his  land,  and  robs  these  generally 
poverty-stricken  people  of  all  he  can  get  from  them.  This 
man’s  right  of  property  in  the  land  rests  on  the  fact  that  at 
every  effort  on  the  part  of  the  oppressed  people,  without 
his  consent,  to  make  use  of  the  land  he  considers  his,  troops 


IS  WITHIN  YOlf." 


337 


are  called  out  to  subject  them  to  punishment  and  murder. 
One  would  have  thought  that  it  was  obvious  that  a man 
living  in  this  way  was  an  evil,  egoistic  creature  and  could 
not  possibly  consider  himself  a Christian  or  a liberal.  One 
would  have  supposed  it  evident  that  the  first  thing  such 
a man  must  do,  if  he  wishes  to  approximate  to  Christianity 
or  liberalism,  would  be  to  cease  to  plunder  and  ruin  men  by 
means  of  acts  of  state  violence  in  support  of  his  claim  to  the 
land.  And  so  it  would  be  if  it  were  not  for  the  logic  of 
hypocrisy,  which  reasons  that  from  a religious  point  of  view 
possession  or  non-possession  of  land  is  of  no  consequence 
for  salvation,  and  from  the  scientific  point  of  view,  giving 
up  the  ownership  of  land  is  a useless  individual  renuncia- 
tion, and  that  the  welfare  of  mankind  is  not  promoted  in 
that  way,  but  by  a gradual  modification  of  external  forms. 
And  so  we  see  this  man,  without  the  least  trouble  of  mind 
or  doubt  that  people  will  believe  in  his  sincerity,  organizing 
an  agricultural  exhibition,  or  a temperance  society,  or 
sending  some  soup  and  stockings  by  his  wife  or  children  to 
three  old  women,  and  boldly  in  his  family,  in  drawing 
rooms,  in  committees,  and  in  the  press,  advocating  the 
Gospel  or  humanitarian  doctrine  of  love  for  one’s  neighbor 
in  general  and  the  agricultural  laboring  population  in 
particular  whom  he  is  continually  exploiting  and  oppressing. 
And  other  people  who  are  in  the  same  position  as  he 
believe  him,  commend  him,  and  solemnly  discuss  with  him 
measures  for  ameliorating  the  condition  of  the  working- 
class,  on  whose  exploitation  their  whole  life  rests,  devising 
all  kinds  of  possible  methods  for  this,  except  the  one  with- 
out which  all  improvement  of  their  condition  is  impossible, 
i.  <f.,  refraining  from  taking  from  them  the  land  necessary 
for  their  subsistence.  (A  striking  example  of  this  hypoc- 
risy was  the  solicitude  displayed  by  the  Russian  land- 
owners  last  year,  their  efforts  to  combat  the  famine  which 
they  had  caused,  and  by  which  they  profited,  selling  not 


33^  “ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 

only  bread  at  the  highest  price,  but  even  potato  haulm  at 
five  rubles  the  dessiatine  (about  2-|  acres)  for  fuel  to  the 
freezing  peasants.) 

Or  take  a merchant  whose  whole  trade — like  all  trade 
indeed — is  founded  on  a series  of  trickery,  by  means  of 
which,  profiting  by  the  ignorance  or  need  of  others,  he  buys 
goods  below  their  value  and  sells  them  again  above  their 
value.  One  would  have  fancied  it  obvious  that  a man 
whose  whole  occupation  was  based  on  what  in  his  own 
language  is  called  swindling,  if  it  is  done  under  other  con- 
ditions,  ought  to  be  ashamed  of  his  position,  and  could  not 
any  way,  while  he  continues  a merchant,  profess  himself  a 
Christian  or  a liberal. 

But  the  sophistry  of  hypocrisy  reasons  that  the  merchant 
can  pass  for  a virtuous  man  without  giving  up  his  per- 
nicious course  of  action  ; a religious  man  need  only  have 
faith  and  a liberal  man  need  only  promote  the  modification 
of  external  conditions — the  progress  of  industry.  And  so 
we  see  the  merchant  (who  often  goes  further  and  commits 
acts  of  direct  dishonesty,  selling  adulterated  goods,  using 
false  weights  and  measures,  and  trading  in  products  injuri- 
ous to  health,  such  as  alcohol  and  opium)  boldly  regarding 
himself  and  being  regarded  by  others,  so  long  as  he  does 
not  directly  deceive  his  colleagues  in  business,  as  a pattern 
of  probity  and  virtue.  And  if  he  spends  a thousandth  part 
of  his  stolen  wealth  on  some  public  institution,  a hospital 
or  museum  or  school,  then  he  is  even  regarded  as  the  bene- 
factor of  the  people  on  the  exploitation  and  corruption  of 
whom  his  whole  prosperity  has  been  founded ; if  he  sacri- 
fices, too,  a portion  of  his  ill-gotten  gains  on  a Church  and 
the  poor,  then  he  is  an  exemplary  Christian. 

A manufacturer  is  a man  whose  whole  income  consists  of 
value  squeezed  out  of  the  workmen,  and  whose  whole  occu- 
pation is  based  on  forced,  unnatural  labor,  exhausting 
whole  generations  of  men.  It  would  seem  obvious  that  if 


IS  WITHIN  YOU." 


339 


this  man  professes  any  Christian  or  liberal  principles,  he 
must  first  of  all  give  up  ruining  human  lives  for  his  own 
profit.  But  by  the  existing  theory  he  is  promoting  indus- 
try, and  he  ought  not  to  abandon  his  pursuit.  It  would 
even  be  injuring  society  for  him  to  do  so.  And  so  we  see 
this  man,  the  harsh  slave-driver  of  thousands  of  men,  build- 
ing almshouses  with  little  gardens  two  yards  square  for  the 
workmen  broken  down  in  toiling  for  him,  and  a bank,  and 
a poorhouse,  and  a hospital — fully  persuaded  that  he  has 
amply  expiated  in  this  way  for  all  the  human  lives  morally 
and  physically  ruined  by  him — and  calmly  going  on  with 
his  business,  taking  pride  in  it. 

Any  civil,  religious,  or  military  official  in  government 
employ,  who  serves  the  state  from  vanity,  or,  as  is  most 
often  the  case,  simply  for  the  sake  of  the  pay  wrung  from 
the  harassed  and  toilworn  working  classes  (all  taxes,  how- 
ever raised,  always  fall  on  labor),  if  he,  as  is  very  seldom 
the  case,  does  not  directly  rob  the  government  in  the  usual 
way,  considers  himself,  and  is  considered  by  his  fellows,  as 
a most  useful  and  virtuous  member  of  society. 

A judge  or  a public  prosecutor  knows  that  through  his 
sentence  or  his  prosecution  hundreds  or  thousands  of  poor 
wretches  are  at  once  torn  from  their  families  and  thrown 
into  prison,  where  they  may  go  out  of  their  minds,  kill 
themselves  with  pieces  of  broken  glass,  or  starve  them- 
selves ; he  knows  that  they  have  wives  and  mothers  and 
children,  disgraced  and  made  miserable  by  separation  from 
them,  vainly  begging  for  pardon  for  them  or  some  allevia- 
tion of  their  sentence,  and  this  judge  f)r  this  prosecutor  is 
so  hardened  in  his  hypocrisy  that  he  and  his  fellows  and 
his  wife  and  his  household  are  all  fully  convinced  that  he 
may  be  a most  exemplary  man.  According  to  the  meta- 
physics of  hypocrisy  it  is  held  that  he  is  doing  a work  of 
public  utility.  And  this  man  who  has  ruined  hundreds, 
thousands  of  men,  who  curse  him  and  are  driven  to  despera- 


34° 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


tion  by  his  action,  goes  to  mass,  a smile  of  shining  benevo- 
lence on  his  smooth  face,  in  perfect  faith  in  good  and  in 
God,  listens  to  the  Gospel,  caresses  his  children,  preaches 
moral  principles  to  them,  and  is  moved  by  imaginary 
sufferings. 

All  these  men  and  those  who  depend  on  them,  their 
wives,  tutors,  children,  cooks,  actors,  jockeys,  and  so  on, 
are  living  on  the  blood  which  by  one  means  or  another, 
through  one  set  of  blood-suckers  or  another,  is  drawn  out 
of  the  working  class,  and  every  day  their  pleasures  cost 
hundreds  or  thousands  of  days  of  labor.  They  see  the 
sufferings  and  privations  of  these  laborers  and  their  chil- 
dren, their  aged,  their  wives,  and  their  sick,  they  know  the 
punishments  inflicted  on  those  who  resist  this  organized 
plunder,  and  far  from  decreasing,  far  from  concealing  their 
luxury,  they  insolently  display  it  before  these  oppressed 
laborers  who  hate  them,  as  though  intentionally  provoking 
them  with  the  pomp  of  their  parks  and  palaces,  their 
theaters,  hunts,  and  races.  At  the  same  time  they  continue 
to  persuade  themselves  and  others  that  they  are  all  much 
concerned  about  the  welfare  of  these  working  classes, 
whom  they  have  always  trampled  under  their  feet,  and  on 
Sundays,  richly  dressed,  they  drive  in  sumptuous  carriages 
to  the  houses  of  God  built  in  very  mockery  of  Christianity, 
and  there  listen  to  men,  trained  to  this  work  of  deception, 
who  in  white  neckties  or  in  brocaded  vestments,  according 
to  their  denomination,  preach  the  love  for  their  neighbor 
which  they  all  gainsay  in  their  lives.  And  these  people 
have  so  entered  into  their  part  that  they  seriously  believe 
that  they  really  are  what  they  pretend  to  be. 

The  universal  hypocrisy  has  so  entered  into  the  flesh 
and  blood  of  all  classes  of  our  modern  society,  it  has 
reached  such  a pitch  that  nothing  in  that  way  can  rouse 
indignation.  Hypocrisy  in  the  Greek  means  “ acting,”  and 
acting — playing  a part — is  always  possible.  The  represent- 


/S  WJTHTN  YOU." 


341 


atives  of  Christ  give  their  blessing  to  the  ranks  of 
murderers  holding  their  guns  loaded  against  their  brothers  ; 
“for  prayer  ” priests,  ministers  of  various  Christian  sects 
are  always  present,  as  indispensably  as  the  hangman,  at 
executions,  and  sanction  by  their  presence  the  compati- 
bility of  murder  with  Christianity  (a  clergyman  assisted  at 
the  attempt  at  murder  by  electricity  in  America) — but  such 
facts  cause  no  one  any  surprise. 

There  was  recently  held  at  Petersburg  an  international 
exhibition  of  instruments  of  torture,  handcuffs,  models  of 
solitary  cells,  that  is  to  say  instruments  of  torture  worse 
than  knouts  or  rods,  and  sensitive  ladies  and  gentlemen 
went  and  amused  themselves  by  looking  at  them. 

No  one  is  surprised  that  together  with  its  recognition  of 
liberty,  equality,  and  fraternity,  liberal  science  should  prove 
the  necessity  of  war,  punishment,  customs,  the  censure,  the 
regulation  of  prostitution,  the  exclusion  of  cheap  foreign 
laborers,  the  hindrance  of  emigration,  the  justifiableness 
of  colonization,  based  on  poisoning  and  destroying  whole 
races  of  men  called  savages,  and  so  on. 

People  talk  of  the  time  when  all  men  shall  profess  what 
is  called  Christianity  (that  is,  various  professions  of  faith 
hostile  to  one  another),  when  all  shall  be  well-fed  and 
clothed,  when  all  shall  be  united  from  one  end  of  the 
world  to  the  other  by  telegraphs  and  telephones,  and  be 
able  to  communicate  by  balloons,  when  all  the  working 
classes  are  permeated  by  socialistic  doctrines,  when  the 
Trades  Unions  possess  so  many  millions  of  members  and 
so  many  millions  of  rubles,  when  everyone  is  educated  and 
all  can  read  newspapers  and  learn  all  the  sciences. 

But  what  good  or  useful  thing  can  come  of  all  these  im- 
provements, if  men  do  not  speak  and  act  in  accordance 
with  what  they  believe  to  be  the  truth  ? 

The  condition  of  men  is  the  result  of  their  disunion. 
Their  disunion  results  from  their  not  following  the  truth 


342 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


which  is  one,  but  falsehoods  which  are  many.  The  sole 
means  of  uniting  men  is  their  union  in  the  truth.  And 
therefore  the  more  sincerely  men  strive  toward  the  truth, 
the  nearer  they  get  to  unity. 

But  how  can  men  be  united  in  the  truth  or  even  approx- 
imate to  it,  if  they  do  not  even  express  the  truth  they  know, 
but  hold  that  there  is  no  need  to  do  so,  and  pretend  to 
regard  as  truth  what  they  believe  to  be  false  ? 

And  therefore  no  improvement  is  possible  so  long  as 
men  are  hypocritical  and  hide  the  truth  from  themselves, 
so  long  as  they  do  not  recognize  that  their  union  and  there- 
fore their  welfare  is  only  possible  in  the  truth,  and  do  not 
put  the  recognition  and  profession  of  the  truth  revealed 
--to  them  higher  than  everything  else. 

All  the  material  improvements  that  religious  and  scien- 
tific men  can  dream  of  may  be  accomplished  ; all  men  may 
accept  Christianity,  and  all  the  reforms  desired  by  the 
Bellamys  may  be  brought  about  with  every  possible  addi- 
tion and  improvement,., but  if  the  hypocrisy  which  rules 
nowadays  still  exists,  if  men  do  not  profess  the  truth  they 
know,  but  continue  to  feign  belief  in  what  they  do  not  be- 
lieve and  veneration  for  what  they  do  not  respect,  their 
condition  will  remain  the  same,  or  even  grow  worse  and 
worse.  The  more  men  are  freed  from  privation  ; the  more 
telegraphs,  telephones,  books,  papers,  and  journals  there 
are ; the  more  means  there  will  be  of  diffusing  inconsistent 
lies  and  hypocrisies,  and  the  more  disunited  and  conse- 
quently miserable  will  men  become,  which  indeed  is  what 
we  see  actually  taking  place. 

All  these  material  reforms  ma)'^  be  realized,  but  the  posi- 
tion of  humanity  will  not  be  improved.  But  only  let  each 
man,  according  to  his  powers,  at  once  realize  in  his  life  the 
truth  he  knows,  or  at  least  cease  to  support  the  falsehoods 
he  is  supporting  in  the  place  of  the  truth,  and  at  once,  in 
this  year  1 893,5  we  should  see  such  reforms  as  we  do  not 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


343 


dare  to  hope  for  within  a century — the  emancipation  of 
men  and  the  reign  of  truth  upon  earth. 

Not  without  good  reason  was  Christ’s  only  harsh  and 
threatening  reproof  directed  against  hypocrites  and  hypoc- 
risy. It  is  not  theft  nor  robbery  nor  murder  nor  fornica- 
tion, but  falsehood,  the  special  falsehood  of  hypocrisy, 
which  corrupts  men,  brutalizes  them  and  makes  them  vin- 
dictive, destroys  all  distinction  between  right  and  wrong  in 
their  conscience,  deprives  them  of  what  is  the  true  meaning 
of  all  real  human  life,  and  debars  them  from  all  progress 
toward  perfection. 

Those  who  do  evil  through  ignorance  of  the  truth  pro- 
voke sympathy  with  their  victims  and  repugnance  for  their 
actions,  they  do  harm  only  to  those  they  attack  ; but  those 
who  know  the  truth  and  do  evil  masked  by  hypocrisy, 
injure  themselves  and  their  victims,  and  thousands  of  other 
men  as  well  who  are  led  astray  by  the  falsehood  with  which 
the  wrongdoing  is  disguised. 

Thieves,  robbers,  murderers,  and  cheats,  who  commit 
crimes  recognized  by  themselves  and  everyone  else  as  evil, 
serve  as  an  example  of  what  ought  not  to  be  done,  and 
deter  others  from  similar  crimes.  But  those  who  commit 
the  same  thefts,  robberies,  murders,  and  other  crimes,  dis- 
guising them  under  all  kinds  of  religious  or  scientific  or 
humanitarian  justifications,  as  all  landowners,  merchants, 
manufacturers,  and  government  officials  do,  provoke  others 
to  imitation,  and  so  do  harm  not  only  to  those  who  are 
directly  the  victims  of  their  crimes,  but  to  thousands  and 
millions  of  men  whom  they  corrupt  by  obliterating  their 
sense  of  the  distinction  between  right  and  wrong. 

A single  fortune  gained  by  trading  in  goods  necessary  to 
the  people  or  in  goods  pernicious  in  their  effects,  or  by 
financial  speculations,  or  by  acquiring  land  at  a low  price 
the  value  of  which  is  increased  by  the  needs  of  the  popula- 
tion, or  by  an  industry  ruinous  to  the  health  and  life  of 


344 


•'  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


those  employed  in  it,  or  by  military  or  civil  service  of  the 
state,  or  by  any  employment  which  trades  on  men’s  evil 
iivstincts — a single  fortune  acquired  in  any  of  these  ways, 
not  only  with  the  sanction,  but  even  with  the  approbation 
of  the  leading  men  in  society,  and  masked  with  an  ostenta- 
tion of  philanthropy,  corrupts  men  incomparably  more  than 
millions  of  thefts  and  robberies  committed  against  the 
recognized  forms  of  law  and  punishable  as  crimes. 

A single  execution  carried  out  by  prosperous  educated 
men  uninfluenced  by  passion,  with  the  approbation  and 
assistance  of  Christian  ministers,  and  represented  as  some- 
thing necessary  and  even  just,  is  infinitely  more  corrupting 
and  brutalizing  to  men  than  thousands  of  murders  com- 
mitted by  uneducated  working  people  under  the  influence 
of  passion.  An  execution  such  as  was  proposed  by  Jou- 
kovsky,  which  would  produce  even  a sentiment  of  religious 
emotion  in  the  spectators,  would  be  one  of  the  most  per. 
verting  actions  imaginable.  {See  vol.  iv.  of  the  works  of 
Joukovsky.) 

Every  war,  even  the  most  humanely  conducted,  with  all 
its  ordinary  consequences,  the  destruction  of  harvests, 
robberies,  the  license  and  debauchery,  and  the  murder  with 
the  justifications  of  its  necessity  and  justice,  the  exaltation 
and  glorification  of  military  exploits,  the  worship  of  the 
flag,  the  patriotic  sentiments,  the  feigned  solicitude  for  the 
wounded,  and  so  on,  does  more  in  one  year  to  pervert  men’s 
minds  than  thousands  of  robberies,  murders,  and  arsons 
perpetrated  during  hundreds  of  years  by  individual  men 
under  the  influence  of  passion. 

The  luxurious  expenditure  of  a single  respectable  and 
so-called  honorable  family,  even  within  the  conventional 
limits,  consuming  as  it  does  the  produce  of  as  many  days 
of  labor  as  would  suffice  to  provide  for  thousands  living  in 
privation  near,  does  more  to  pervert  men’s  minds  than 
thousands  of  the  violent  orgies  of  coarse  tradespeople. 


/S  WITHIN  YOU."  345 

officers,  and  workmen  of  drunken  and  debauched  habits, 
who  smash  up  glasses  and  crockery  for  amusement. 

One  solemn  religious  procession,  one  service,  one  sermon 
from  the  altar-steps  or  the  pulpit,  in  which  the  preacher 
does  not  believe,  produces  incomparably  more  evil  than 
thousands  of  swindling  tricks,  adulteration  of  food,  and  so 
on. 

We  talk  of  the  hypocrisy  of  the  Pharisees.  But  the 
hypocrisy  of  our  society  far  surpasses  the  comparatively 
innocent  hypocrisy  of  the  Pharisees.  They  had  at  least  an 
external  religious  law,  the  fulfillment  of  which  hindered 
them  from  seeing  their  obligations  to  their  neighbors. 
Moreover,  these  obligations  were  not  nearly  so  clearly 
defined  in  their  day.  Nowadays  we  have  no  such  religious 
law  to  exonerate  us  from  our  duties  to  our  neighbors  ( I am 
not  speaking  now  of  the  coarse  and  ignorant  persons  who 
still  fancy  their  sins  can  be  absolved  by  confession  to  a 
priest  or  by  the  absolution  of  the  Pope).  On  the  contrary, 
the  law  of  the  Gospel  which  we  all  profess  in  one  form  or 
another  directly  defines  these  duties.  Besides,  the  duties 
which  had  then  been  only  vaguely  and  mystically  expressed 
by  a few  prophets  have  now  been  so  clearly  formulated, 
have  become  such  truisms,  that  they  are  repeated  even  by 
schoolboys  and  journalists.  And  so  it  would  seem  that 
men  of  to-day  cannot  pretend  that  they  do  not  know  these 
duties. 

A man  of  the  modern  world  who  profits  by  the  order  of 
things  based  on  violence,  and  at  the  same  time  protests 
that  he  loves  his  neighbor  and  does  not  observe  what  he  is 
doing  in  his  daily  life  to  his  neighbor,  is  like  a brigand  who 
has  spent  his  life  in  robbing  men,  and  who,  caught  at  last, 
knife  in  hand,  in  the  very  act  of  striking  his  shrieking 
victim,  should  declare  that  he  had  no  idea  that  what  he  was 
doing  was  disagreeable  to  the  man  he  had  robbed  and  was 
prepared  to  murder.  Just  as  this  robber  and  murderer 


346 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


could  not  deny  what  was  evident  to  everyone,  so  it  would 
seem  that  a man  living  upon  the  privations  of  the  oppressed 
classes  cannot  persuade  himself  and  others  that  he  desires 
the  welfare  of  those  he  plunders,  and  that  he  does  not 
know  how  the  advantages  he  enjoys  are  obtained. 

It  is  impossible  to  convince  ourselves  that  we  do  not 
know  that  there  are  a hundred  thousand  men  in  prison  in 
Russia  alone  to  guarantee  the  security  of  our  property  and 
tranquillity,  and  that  we  do  not  know  of  the  law  tribunals 
in  which  we  take  part,  and  which,  at  our  initiative,  condemn 
those  who  have  attacked  our  property  or  our  security  to 
prison,  exile,  or  forced  labor,  whereby  men  no  worse  than 
those  who  condemn  them  are  ruined  and  corrupted  ; or 
that  we  do  not  know  that  we  only  possess  all  that  we  do 
possess  because  it  has  been  acquired  and  is  defended  for  us 
by  murder  and  violence. 

We  cannot  pretend  that  we  do  not  see  the  armed  police- 
man who  marches  up  and  down  beneath  our  windows  to 
guarantee  our  security  while  we  eat  our  luxurious  dinner, 
or  look  at  the  new  piece  at  the  theater,  or  that  we  are 
unaware  of  the  existence  of  the  soldiers  who  will  make 
their  appearance  with  guns  and  cartridges  directly  our 
property  is  attacked. 

We  know  very  well  that  we  are  only  allowed  to  go  on 
eating  our  dinner,  to  finish  seeing  the  new  play,  or  to  enjoy 
to  the  end  the  ball,  the  Christmas  fete,  the  promenade,  the 
races  or  the  hunt,  thanks  to  the  policeman’s  revolver  or 
the  soldier’s  rifle,  which  will  shoot  down  the  famished  out- 
cast who  has  been  robbed  of  his  share,  and  who  looks 
round  the  corner  with  covetous  eyes  at  our  pleasures, 
ready  to  interrupt  them  instantly,  were  not  the  policeman 
and  the  soldier  there  prepared  to  run  up  at  our  first  call 
for  help. 

And  therefore  just  as  a brigand  caught  in  broad  daylight 
in  the  act  cannot  persuade  us  that  he  did  not  lift  his  knife 


/S  WITHIN  YOU: 


347 


in  order  to  rob  his  victim  of  his  purse,  and  had  no  thought 
of  killing  him,  we  too,  it  would  seem,  cannot  persuade  our- 
selves or  others  that  the  soldiers  and  policemen  around  us 
are  not  to  guard  us,  but  only  for  defense  against  foreign 
foes,  and  to  regulate  traffic  and  fetes  and  reviews  ; we 
cannot  persuade  ourselves  and  others  that  we  do  not  know 
that  men  do  not  like  dying  of  hunger,  bereft  of  the  right 
to  gain  their  subsistence  from  the  earth  on  which  they  live  ; 
that  they  do  not  like  working  underground,  in  the  water, 
or  in  stifling  heat,  for  ten  to  fourteen  hours  a day,  at 
night  in  factories  to  manufacture  objects  for  our  pleasure. 
One  would  imagine  it  impossible  to  deny  what  is  so  obvious. 
Yet  it  is  denied. 

Still,  there  are,  among  the  rich,  especially  among  the 
young,  and  among  women,  persons  whom  I am  glad  to 
meet  more  and  more  frequently,  who,  when  they  are  shown 
in  what  way  and  at  what  cost  their  pleasures  are  purchased, 
do  not  try  to  conceal  the  truth,  but  hiding  their  heads  in 
their  hands,  cry  : “ Ah  ! don’t  speak  of  that.  If  it  is  so, 
life  is  impossible.”  But  though  there  are  such  sincere 
people  who  even  though  they  cannot  renounce  their  fault, 
at  least  see  it,  the  vast  majority  of  the  men  of  the  modern 
world  have  so  entered  into  the  parts  they  play  in  their 
hypocrisy  that  they  boldly  deny  what  is  staring  everyone  in 
the  face. 

“ All  that  is  unjust,”  they  say  ; “ no  one  forces  the  people 
to  work  for  the  landowners  and  manufacturers.  That  is  an 
affair  of  free  contract.  Great  properties  and  fortunes  are 
necessary,  because  they  provide  and  organize  work  for  the 
working  classes.  And  labor  in  the  factories  and  workshops 
is  not  at  all  the  terrible  thing  you  make  it  out  to  be.  Even 
if  there  are  some  abuses  in  factories,  the  government  and 
the  public  are  taking  steps  to  obviate  them  and  to  make 
the  labor  of  the  factory  workers  much  easier,  and  even 
agreeable.  The  working  classes  are  accustomed  to  physical 


348 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


labor,  and  are,  so  far,  fit  for  nothing  else.  The  poverty  of 
the  people  is  not  the  result  of  private  property  in  land,  nor 
of  capitalistic  oppression,  but  of  other  causes  : it  is  the 
result  of  the  ignorance,  brutality,  and  intemperance  of 
the  people.  And  we  men  in  authority  who  are  striving 
against  this  impoverishment  of  the  people  by  wise  legisla- 
tion, we  capitalists  who  are  combating  it  by  the  extension 
of  useful  inventions,  we  clergymen  by  religious  instruc- 
tion, and  we  liberals  by  the  formation  of  trades  unions, 
and  the  diffusion  of  education,  are  in  this  way  increasing 
the  prosperity  of  the  people  without  changing  our  own 
positions.  We  do  not  want  all  to  be  as  poor  as  the  poor  ; 
we  want  all  to  be  as  rich  as  the  rich.  As  for  the  assertion 
that  men  are  ill  treated  and  murdered  to  force  them  to 
work  for  the  profit  of  the  rich,  that  is  a sophism.  The 
army  is  only  called  out  against  the  mob,  when  the  people,  in 
ignorance  of  their  own  interests,  make  disturbances  and 
destroy  the  tranquillity  necessary  for  the  public  welfare. 
In  the  same  way,  too,  it  is  necessary  to  keep  in  restraint 
the  malefactors  for  whom  the  prisons  and  gallows  are 
established.  We  ourselves  wish  to  suppress  these  forms  of 
punishment  and  are  working  in  that  direction.” 

' Hypocrisy  in  our  day  is  supported  on  two  sides  : by 
false  religion  and  by  false  science.  And  it  has  reached 
such  proportions  that  if  we  wei'e  not  living  in  its  midst,  we 
could  not  believe  that  men  could  attain  such  a pitch  of 

Lself-deception.  Men  of  the  present  day  have  come  into 
such  an  extraordinary  condition,  their  hearts  are  so 
hardened,  that  seeing  they  see  not,  hearing  they  do  not 
hear,  and  understand  not. 

Men  have  long  been  living  in  antagonism  to  their  con- 
science. If  it  were  not  for  hypocrisy  they  could  not  go  on 
living  such  a life.  This  social  organization  in  opposition 
to  their  conscience  only  continues  to  exist  because  it  is  dis- 
guised by  hypocris}'. 


IS  WITHIN  YOU. 


349 


And  the  greater  the  divergence  between  actual  life  and 
men’s  conscience,  the  greater  the  extension  of  hypocrisy. 
But  even  hypocrisy  has  its  limits.  And  it  seems  to  me 
that  we  have  reached  those  limits  in  the  present  da3\ 

Every  man  of  the  present  day  with  the  Christian  princi- 
ples assimilated  involuntarily  in  his  conscience,  finds  him- 
self in  precisely  the  position  of  a man  asleep  who  dreams 
that  he  is  obliged  to  do  something  which  even  in  his  dream 
he  knows  he  ought  not  to  do.  He  knows  this  in  the  depths 
of  his  conscience,  and  all  the  same  he  seems  unable  to 
change  his  position  ; he  cannot  stop  and  cease  doing  what 
he  ought  not  to  do.  And  just  as  in  a dream,  his  position 
becoming  more  and  more  painful,  at  last  reaches  such  a 
pitch  of  intensity  that  he  begins  sometimes  to  doubt  the 
reality  of  what  is  passing  and  makes  a moral  effort  to  shake 
off  the  nightmare  which  is  oppressing  him. 

This  is  just  the  condition  of  the  average  man  of  our 
Christian  society.  He  feels  that  all  that  he  does  himself 
and  that  is  done  around  him  is  something  absurd,  hideous, 
impossible,  and  opposed  to  his  conscience  ; he  feels  that  his 
position  is  becoming  more  and  more  unendurable  and 
reaching  a crisis  of  intensity. 

It  is  not  possible  that  we  modern  men,  with  the  Christian 
sense  of  human  dignity  and  equality  permeating  us  soul 
and  body,  with  our  need  for  peaceful  association  and  unity 
between  nations,  should  really  go  on  living  in  such  a way 
that  every  joy,  every  gratification  we  have  is  bought  by 
the  sufferings,  by  the  lives  of  our  brother  men,  and  more- 
over, that  we  should  be  every  instant  within  a hair’s-breadth 
of  falling  on  one  another,  nation  against  nation,  like  wild 
beasts,  mercilessly  destroying  men’s  lives  and  labor,  only 
because  some  benighted  diplomatist  or  ruler  says  or  writes 
some  stupidity  to  another  equally  benighted  diplomatist  or 
ruler. 

It  is  impossible.  Yet  every  man  of  our  day  sees  that 


35° 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


this  is  so  and  awaits  the  calamity.  And  the  situation 
becomes  more  and  more  insupportable. 

And  as  the  man  who  is  dreaming  does  not  believe  that 
what  appears  to  him  can  be  truly  the  reality  and  tries  to 
wake  up  to  the  actual  real  world  again,  so  the  average  man 
of  modern  days  cannot  in  the  bottom  of  his  heart  believe 
that  the  awful  position  in  which  he  is  placed  and  which  is 
growing  worse  and  worse  can  be  the  reality,  and  tries  to 
wake  up  to  a true,  real  life,  as  it  exists  in  his  conscience. 

And  just  as  the  dreamer  need  only  make  a moral  effort 
and  ask  himself,  “ Isn’t  it  a dream?”  and  the  situation 
which  seemed  to  him  so  hopeless  will  instantly  disappear, 
and  he  will  wake  up  to  peaceful  and  happy  reality,  so  the 
man  of  the  modern  world  need  only  make  a moral  effort  to 
doubt  the  reality  presented  to  him  by  his  own  hypocrisy 
and  the  general  hypocrisy  around  him,  and  to  ask  himself, 
‘‘Isn’t  it  all  a delusion  ?”  and  he  will  at  once,  like  the 
dreamer  awakened,  feel  himself  transported  from  an  imag- 
inary and  dreadful  world  to  the  true,  calm,  and  happy 
reality. 

And  to  do  this  a man  need  accomplish  no  great  feats  or 
exploits.  He  need  only  make  a moral  effort. 

But  can  a man  make  this  effort  ? 

. According  to  the  existing  theory  so  essential  to  support 
hypocrisy,  man  is  not  free  and  cannot  change  his  life. 

“ Man  cannot  change  his  life,  because  he  is  not  free.  He 
is  not  free,  because  all  his  actions  are  conditioned  by  pre- 
viously existing  causes.  And  whatever  the  man  may  do 
there  are  always  some  causes  or  other  through  which  he 
does  these  or  those  acts,  and  therefore  man  cannot  be  free 
and  change  his  life,”  say  the  champions  of  the  metaphysics 
of  hypocrisy.  And  they  would  be  perfectly  right  if  man 
were  a creature  without  conscience  and  incapable  of  mov- 
ing toward  the  truth  ; that  is  to  say,  if  after  recognizing 
a new  truth,  man  always  remained  at  the  same  stage  of 


/5  WITHIN  YOU. 


35 1 

moral  development.  But  man  is  a creature  with  a con- 
science and  capable  of  attaining  a higher  and  higher 
degree  of  truth.  And  therefore  even  if  man  is  not  free 
as  regards  performing  these  or  those  acts  because  there 
exists  a previous  cause  for  every  act,  the  very  causes  of 
his  acts,  consisting  as  they  do  for  the  man  of  conscience  of 
the  recognition  of  this  or  that  truth,  are  within  his  own 
control. 

So  that  though  man  may  not  be  free  as  regards  the 
performance  of  his  actions,  he  is  free  as  regards  the  foun- 
dation on  which  they  are  performed.  Just  as  the  mechan- 
ician who  is  not  free  to  modify  the  movement  of  his  loco- 
motive when  it  is  in  motion,  is  free  to  regulate  the  machine 
beforehand  so  as  to  determine  what  the  m.ovement  is  to  be. 

Whatever  the  conscious  man  does,  he  acts  just  as  he 
does,  and  not  otherwise,  only  because  he  recognizes  that  to 
act  as  he  is  acting  is  in  accord  with  the  truth,  or  because 
he  has  recognized  it  at  some  previous  time,  and  is  now 
only  through  inertia,  through  habit,  acting  in  accordance 
with  his  previous  recognition  of  truth. 

In  any  case,  the  cause  of  his  action  is  not  to  be  found  in 
any  given  previous  fact,  but  in  the  consciousness  of  a given 
relation  to  truth,  and  the  consequent  recognition  of  this  or 
that  fact  as  a sufficient  basis  for  action. 

Whether  a man  eats  or  does  not  eat,  works  or  rests,  runs 
risks  or  avoids  them,  if  he  has  a conscience  he  acts  thus 
only  because  he  considers  it  right  and  rational,  because  he 
considers  that  to  act  thus  is  in  harmony  with  truth,  or  else 
because  he  has  made  this  reflection  in  the  past. 

The  recognition  or  non-recognition  of  a certain  truth 
depends  not  on  external  causes,  but  on  certain  other  causes 
within  the  man  himself.  So  that  at  times  under  external 
conditions  apparently  very  favorable  for  the  recognition  of 
truth,  one  man  will  not  recognize  it,  and  another,  on  the 
contrary,  under  the  most  unfavorable  conditions  will,  with- 


352 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


out  apparent  cause,  recognize  it.  As  it  is  said  in  the  Gos- 
pel, “ No  man  can  come  unto  me,  except  the  Father  which 
hath  sent  me  draw  him.”  That  is  to  say,  the  recognition  of 
truth,  which  is  the  cause  of  all  the  manifestations  of  human 
life,  does  not  depend  on  external  phenomena,  but  on  certain 
inner  spiritual  characteristics  of  the  man  which  escape  our 
observation. 

And  therefore  man,  though  not  free  in  his  acts,  always 
feels  himself  free  in  what  is  the  motive  of  his  acts — the 
recognition  or  non-recognition  of  truth.  And  he  feels  him- 
self independent  not  only  of  facts  external  to  his  own  per- 
sonality, but  even  of  his  own  actions. 

Thus  a man  who  under  the  influence  of  passion  has 
committed  an  act  contrary  to  the  truth  he  recognizes, 
remains  none  the  less  free  to  recognize  it  or  not  to  recog- 
nize it  ; that  is,  he  can  by  refusing  to  recognize  the  truth 
regard  his  action  as  necessary  and  justifiable,  or  he  may 
recognize  the  truth  and  regard  his  act  as  wrong  and  censure 
himself  for  it. 

Thus  a gambler  or  a drunkard  who  does  not  resist  temp- 
tation and  yields  to  his  passion  is  still  free  to  recognize 
gambling  and  drunkenness  as  wrong  or  to  regard  them  as  a 
harmless  pastime.  In  the  first  case  even  if  he  does  not  at 
once  get  over  his  passion,  he  gets  the  more  free  from  it  the 
more  sincerely  he  recognizes  the  truth  about  it  ; in  the 
second  case  he  will  be  strengthened  in  his  vice  and  will 
deprive  himself  of  every  possibility  of  shaking  it  off. 

In  the  same  way  a man  who  has  made  his  escape  alone 
from  a house  on  fire,  not  having  had  the  courage  to  save  his 
friend,  remains  free,  recognizing  the  truth  that  a man  ought 
to  save  the  life  of  another  even  at  the  risk  of  his  own,  to 
regard  his  action  as  bad  and  to  censure  himself  for  it,  or, 
not  recognizing  this  truth,  to  regard  his  action  as  natural 
and  necessauy  and  to  justify  it  to  himself.  In  the  first 
case,  if  he  recognizes  the  truth  in  spite  of  his  departure 


75  WITHIN  YOU." 


353 


from  it,  he  prepares  for  himself  in  the  future  a whole  series 
of  acts  of  self-sacrifice  necessarily  flowing  from  this  recog- 
nition of  the  truth  ; in  the  second  case,  a whole  series  of 
egoistic  acts. 

Not  that  a man  is  always  free  to  recognize  or  to  refuse 
to  recognize  every  truth.  There  are  truths  which  he  has 
recognized  long  before  or  which  have  been  handed  down  to 
him  by  education  and  tradition  and  accepted  by  him  on 
faith,  and  to  follow  these  truths  has  become  a habit,  a second 
nature  with  him  ; and  there  are  truths,  only  vaguely,  as  it 
were  distantly,  apprehended  by  him.  The  man  is  not  free 
to  refuse  to  recognize  the  first,  nor  to  recognize  the  second 
class  of  truths.  But  there  are  truths  of  a third  kind,  which 
have  not  yet  become  an  unconscious  motive  of  action,  but 
yet  have  been  revealed  so  clearly  to  him  that  he  cannot 
pass  them  by,  and  is  inevitably  obliged  to  do  one  thing  or 
the  other,  to  recognize  or  not  to  recognize  them.  And  it 
is  in  regard  to  these  truths  that  the  man’s  freedom  mani- 
fests itself. 

Every  man  during  his  life  finds  himself  in  regard  to 
truth  in  the  position  of  a man  walking  in  the  darkness  with 
light  thrown  before  him  by  the  lantern  he  carries.  He 
does  not  see  what  is  not  yet  lighted  up  by  the  lantern  ; he 
does  not  see  what  he  has  passed  which  is  hidden  in  the 
darkness  ; but  at  every  stage  of  his  journey  he  sees  what 
is  lighted  up  by  the  lantern,  and  he  can  always  choose  one 
side  or  the  other  of  the  road. 

There  are  always  unseen  truths  not  yet  revealed  to  the 
man’s  intellectual  vision,  and  there  are  other  truths  out- 
lived, forgotten,  and  assimilated  by  him,  and  there  are  also 
certain  truths  that  rise  up  before  the  light  of  his  reason 
and  require  his  recognition.  And  it  is  in  the  recognition 
or  non-recognition  of  these  truths  that  what  w'e  call  his 
freedom  is  manifested. 

All  the  difficulty  and  seeming  insolubility  of  the  question 


354 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


of  the  freedom  of  man  results  from  those  who  tried  to 
solve  the  question  imagining  man  as  stationary  in  his  re- 
lation to  the  truth, 

Man  is  certainly  not  free  if  we  imagine  him  stationary, 
and  if  we  forget  that  the  life  of  a man  and  of  humanity  is 
nothing  but  a continual  movement  from  darkness  into  light, 
from  a lower  stage  of  truth  to  a higher,  from  a truth  more 
alloyed  with  errors  to  a truth  more  purified  from  them. 

Man  would  not  be  free  if  he  knew  no  truth  at  all,  and  in 
the  same  way  he  would  not  be  free  and  would  not  even 
have  any  idea  of  freedom  if  the  whole  truth  which  was  to 
guide  him  in  life  had  been  revealed  once  for  all  to  him  in 
all  its  purity  without  any  admixture  of  error. 

But  man  is  not  stationary  in  regard  to  truth,  but  every 
individual  man  as  he  passes  through  life,  and  humanity  as 
a whole  in  the  same  way,  is  continually  learning  to  know 
a greater  and  greater  degree  of  truth,  and  growing  more 
and  more  free  from  error. 

And  therefore  men  are  in  a threefold  relation  to  truth. 
Some  truths  have  been  so  assimilated  by  them  that  they 
have  become  the  unconscious  basis  of  action,  others  are 
only  just  on  the  point  of  being  revealed  to  him,  and  a 
third  class,  though  not  yet  assimilated  by  him,  have  been 
revealed  to  him  with  sufficient  clearness  to  force  him  to 
decide  either  to  recognize  them  or  to  refuse  to  recognize 
them. 

These,  then,  are  the  truths  which  man  is  free  to  recog- 
nize or  to  refuse  to  recognize. 

The  liberty  of  man  does  not  consist  in  the  power  of  act- 
ing independently  of  the  progress  of  life  and  the  influences 
arising  from  it,  but  in  the  capacity  for  recognizing  and 
acknowledging  the  truth  revealed  to  him,  and  becoming 
the  free  and  joyful  participator  in  the  eternal  and  infinite 
work  of  God,  the  life  of  the  world  ; or  on  the  other  hand 
for  refusing  to  recognize  the  truth,  and  so  being  a miser- 


/S  WITHIN  YOU."  355 

able  and  reluctant  slave  dragged  whither  he  has  no  desire 
to  go. 

Truth  not  only  points  out  the  way  along  which  human 
life  ought  to  move,  but  reveals  also  the  only  way  along 
which  it  can  move.  And  therefore  all  men  must  willingly 
or  unwillingly  move  along  the  way  of  truth,  some  spon- 
taneously  accomplishing  the  task  set  them  in  life,  others 
submitting  involuntarily  to  the  law  of  life.  Man’s  freedom 
lies  in  the  power  of  this  choice. 

This  freedom  within  these  narrow  limits  seems  so 
insignificant  to  men  that  they  do  not  notice  it.  Some — 
the  determinists — consider  this  amount  of  freedom  so 
trifling  that  they  do  not  recognize  it  at  all.  Others — the 
champions  of  complete  free  will — keep  their  eyes  fixed  on 
their  hypothetical  free  will  and  neglect  this  which  seemed 
to  them  such  a trivial  degree  of  freedom. 

This  freedom,  confined  between  the  limits  of  complete 
ignorance  of  the  truth  and  a recognition  of  a part  of  the 
truth,  seems  hardly  freedom  at  all,  especially  since, 
whether  a man  is  willing  or  unwilling  to  recognize  the 
truth  revealed  to  him,  he  will  be  inevitably  forced  to  carry 
it  out  in  life. 

A horse  harnessed  with  others  to  a cart  is  not  free  to 
refrain  from  moving  the  cart.  If  he  does  not  move  for- 
ward the  cart  will  knock  him  down  and  go  on  dragging 
him  with  it,  whether  he  will  or  not.  But  the  horse  is  free 
to  drag  the  cart  himself  or  to  be  dragged  with  it.  And  so 
it  is  with  man. 

Whether  this  is  a great  or  small  degree  of  freedom  in  com- 
parison with  the  fantastic  liberty  we  should  like  to  have,  it 
is  the  only  freedom  that  really  exists,  and  in  it  consists  the 
only  happiness  attainable  by  man. 

And  more  than  that,  this  freedom  is  the  sole  means  of 
accomplishing  the  divine  work  of  the  life  of  the  world. 

According  to  Christ’s  doctrine,  the  man  who  sees  the  sig- 


356 


•'  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


nificance  of  life  in  the  domain  in  which  it  is  not  free,  in  the 
domain  of  effects,  that  is,  of  acts,  has  not  the  true  life. 
According  to  the  Christian  doctrine,  that  man  is  living  in 
the  truth  who  has  transported  his  life  to  the  domain  in 
which  it  is  free — the  domain  of  causes,  that  is,  the  knowl- 
edge and  recognition,  the  profession  and  realization  in  life 
of  revealed  truth. 

Devoting  his  life  to  works  of  the  flesh,  a man  busies  him- 
self with  actions  depending  on  temporary  causes  outside 
himself.  He  himself  does  nothing  really,  he  merely  seems 
to  be  doing  something.  In  reality  all  the  acts  v'hich  seem 
to  be  his  are  the  work  of  a higher  power,  and  he  is  not  the 
creator  of  his  own  life,  but  the  slave  of  it.  Devoting  his 
life  to  the  recognition  and  fulfillment  of  the  truth  revealed 
to  him,  he  identifies  himself  with  the  source  of  universal  life 
and  accomplishes  acts  not  personal,  and  dependent  on  con- 
ditions of  space  and  time,  but  acts  unconditioned  by  pre- 
vious causes,  acts  which  constitute  the  causes  of  everything 
else,  and  have  an  infinite,  unlimited  significance. 

“The  kingdom  of  heaven  sufferetli  violence,  and  the  vio- 
lent take  it  by  force.’’  (Matt.  xi.  12.) 

It  is  this  violent  effort  to  rise  above  external  conditions 
to  the  recognition  and  realization  of  truth  by  which  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  is  taken,  and  it  is  this  effort  of  violence 
which  must  and  can  be  made  in  our  times. 

Men  need  only  understand  this,  they  need  only  cease  to 
trouble  themselves  about  the  general  external  conditions  in 
which  they  are  not  free,  and  devote  one-hundredth  part  of 
the  energy  they  waste  on  those  material  things  to  that  in 
which  they  are  free,  to  the  recognition  and  realization  of 
the  truth  which  is  before  them,  and  to  the  liberation  of  them- 
selves and  others  from  deception  and  hypocrisy,  and,  with- 
out effort  or  conflict,  there  would  be  an  end  at  once  of  the 
false  organization  of  life  which  makes  men  miserable,  and 
threatens  them  with  worse  calamities  in  the  future.  And 


75  WITHIN  YOU." 


357 


then  the  kingdom  of  God  would  be  realized,  or  at  least  that 
first  stage  of  it  for  which  men  are  ready  now  by  the  degree 
of  development  of  their  conscience. 

Just  as  a single  shock  may  be  sufficient,  when  a liquid  is 
saturated  with  some  salt,  to  precipitate  it  at  once  in  crystals, 
a slight  effort  may  be  perhaps  all  that  is  needed  now  that 
the  truth  already  revealed  to  men  may  gain  a mastery  over 
hundreds,  thousands,  millions  of  men,  that  a public  opinion 
consistent  with  conscience  may  be  established,  and  through 
this  change  of  public  opinion  the  whole  order  of  life  may  be 
transformed.  And  it  depends  upon  us  to  make  this  effort. 

Let  each  of  us  only  try  to  understand  and  accept  the 
Christian  truth  which  in  the  most  varied  forms  surrounds 
us  on  all  sides  and  forces  itself  upon  us;  let  us  only  cease 
from  lying  and  pretending  that  Ave  do  not  see  this  truth  or 
wish  to  realize  it,  at  least  in  what  it  demands  from  us  above 
all  else;  only  let  us  accept  and  boldly  profess  the  truth  to 
which  Ave  are  called,  and  Ave  should  find  at  once  that  hun- 
dreds, thousands,  millions  of  men  are  in  the  same  position 
as  Ave,  that  they  see  the  truth  as  Ave  do,  and  dread  as  Ave  do 
to  stand  alone  in  recognizing  it,  and  like  us  are  only  Avait- 
ing  for  others  to  recognize  it  also. 

Only  let  men  cease  to  be  hypocrites,  and  they  Avould  at 
once  see  that  this  cruel  social  organization,  Avhich  holds 
them  in  bondage,  and  is  represented  to  them  as  something 
stable,  necessary,  and  ordained  of  God,  is  already  tottering 
and  is  only  propped  up  by  the  falsehood  of  hypocrisy,  Avith 
which  Ave,  and  others  like  us,  support  it. 

But  if  this  is  so,  if  it  is  true  that  it  depends  on  us  to  break ' 
doAAm  the  existing  organization  of  life,  have  aa'c  the  right  to  ^ 
destroy  it,  AAuthout  knoAA-ing  clearly  Avhat  Ave  shall  set  up  in 
its  place?  What  Avill  become  of  human  society  Avhen  the 
existing  order  of  things  is  at  an  end? 

“What  shall  Ave  find  the  other  side  of  the  Avails  of  the 
world  Ave  are  abandoning? 


358 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


“Fear  will  come  upon  us — a void,  a vast  emptiness,  free- 
dom— how  are  we  to  go  forward  not  knowing  whither,  how 
face  loss,  not  seeing  hope  of  gain?  ...  If  Columbus  had 
reasoned  thus  he  would  never  have  weighed  anchor.  It  was 
madness  to  set  off  upon  the  ocean,  not  knowing  the  route, 
on  the  ocean  on  which  no  one  had  sailed,  to  sail  toward  a 
land  whose  existence  was  doubtful.  By  this  madness  he 
discovered  a new  world.  Doubtless  if  the  peoples  of  the 
world  could  simply  transfer  themselves  from  one  furnished 
mansion  to  another  and  better  one — it  would  make  it  much 
easier;  but  unluckily  there  is  no  one  to  get  humanity’s  new 
dwelling  ready  for  it.  The  future  is  even  worse  than  the 
ocean — there  is  nothing  there — it  will  be  what  men  and  cir- 
cumstances make  it. 

“If  you  are  content  with  the  old  world,  try  to  preserve  it, 
it  is  very  sick  and  cannot  hold  out  much  longer.  But  if  you 
cannot  bear  to  live  in  everlasting  dissonance  between  your 
beliefs  and  your  life,  thinking  one  thing  and  doing  another, 
get  out  of  the  mediaeval  whited  sepulchers,  and  face  your 
fears.  I know  very  well  it  is  not  easy. 

“It  is  not  a little  thing  to  cut  one’s  self  off  from  all  to 
which  a man  has  been  accustomed  from  his  birth,  with 
which  he  has  grown  up  to  maturity.  Men  are  ready  for 
tremendous  sacrifices,,  but  not  for  those  which  life  demands 
of  them.  Are  they  ready  to  sacrifice  modern  civilization, 
their  manner  of  life,  their  religion,  the  received  conventional 
morality? 

“Are  we  ready  to  give  up  all  the  results  we  have  attained 
with  such  effort,  results  of  which  we  have  been  boasting  for 
three  centuries;  to  give  up  every  convenience  and  charm  of 
our  existence,  to  prefer  savage  youth  to  the  senile  decay  of 
civilization,  to  pull  down  the  palace  raised  for  us  by  our 
ancestors  only  for  the  pleasure  of  having  a hand  in  the 
founding  of  a new  house,  which  will  doubtless  be  built  long 
after  we  are  gone?’’  (Herzen,  vol.  v.  p.  55.) 


75  WITHm  YOU. 


359 


Thus  wrote  almost  half  a century  ago  the  Russian  writer, 
who  with  prophetic  insight  saw  clearly  then,  what  even  the 
most  unreflecting  man  sees  to-day,  the  impossibility,  that  is, 
of  life  continuing  on  its  old  basis,  and  the  necessity  of 
establishing  new  forms  of  life. 

It  is  clear  now  from  the  very  simplest,  most  commonplace 
point  of  view,  that  it  is  madness  to  remain  under  the  roof  of 
a building  which  cannot  support  its  weight,  and  that  we 
must  leave  it.  And  indeed  it  is  difficult  to  imagine  a posi- 
tion more  wretched  than  that  of  the  Christian  world  to-day, 
with  its  nations  armed  against  one  another,  with  its  con- 
stantly increasing  taxation  to  maintain  its  armies,  with  the 
hatred  of  the  working  class  for  the  rich  ever  growing  more 
intense,  with  the  Damocles  sword  of  war  forever  hanging 
over  the  heads  of  all,  ready  every  instant  to  fall,  certain  to 
fall  sooner  or  later. 

Hardly  could  any  revolution  be  more  disastrous  for  the 
great  mass  of  the  population  than  the  present  order  or  rather 
disorder  of  our  life,  with  its  daily  sacrifices  to  exhausting 
and  unnatural  toil,  to  poverty,  drunkenness,  and  profligacy, 
with  all  the  horrors  of  the  war  that  is  at  hand,  which  will 
swallow  up  in  one  year  more  victims  than  all  the  revolutions 
of  the  century. 

What  will  become  of  humanity  if  each  of  us  performs  the 
duty  God  demands  of  us  through  the  conscience  implanted 
within  us?  Will  not  harm  come  if,  being  wholly  in  the 
power  of  a master,  I carry  out,  in  the  workshop  erected  and 
directed  by  him,  the  orders  he  gives  me,  strange  though 
they  may  seem  to  me  who  do  not  know  the  Master’s  final 
aims? 

But  it  is  not  even  this  question  “What  will  happen?’’ 
that  agitates  men  when  they  hesitate  to  fulfill  the  Master’s 
will.  They  are  troubled  by  the  question  how  to  live  with- 
out those  habitual  conditions  of  life  which  we  call  civiliza- 
tion, culture,  art,  and  science.  We  feel  ourselves  all  the 


“ THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


360 

burdensomeness  of  life  as  it  is;  we  see  also  that  this  organi- 
zation of  life  must  inevitably  be  our  ruin,  if  it  continues. 
At  the  same  time  we  want  the  conditions  of  our  life  which 
arise  out  of  this  organization — our  civilization,  culture,  art, 
and  science — to  remain  intact.  It  is  as  though  a man,  liv- 
ing in  an  old  house  and  suffering  from  cold  and  all  sorts  of 
inconvenience  in  it,  knowing,  too,  that  it  is  on  the  point  of 
falling  to  pieces,  should  consent  to  its  being  rebuilt,  but  only 
on  the  condition  that  he  should  not  be  required  to  leave  it: 
a condition  which  is  equivalent  to  refusing  to  have  it  rebuilt 
at  all. 

“But  what  if  I leave  the  house  and  give  up  every  con- 
venience for  a time,  and  the  new  house  is  not  built,  or  is 
built  on  a different  plan  so  that  I do  not  find  in  it  the  com- 
forts to  which  I am  accustomed?’’  But  seeing  that  the 
materials  and  the  builders  are  here,  there  is  every  likelihood 
that  the  new  house  will  on  the  contrary  be  better  built  than 
the  old  one.  And  at  the  same  time,  there  is  not  only  the 
likelihood  but  the  certainty  that  the  old  house  will  fall  down 
and  crush  those  who  remain  within  it.  Whether  the  old 
habitual  conditions  of  life  are  supported,  or  whether  they 
are  abolished  and  altogether  new  and  better  conditions 
arise;  in  any  case,  there  is  no  doubt  we  shall  be  forced  to 
leave  the  old  forms  of  life  which  have  become  impossible 
and  fatal,  and  must  go  forward  to  meet  the  future. 

“Civilization,  art,  science,  culture,  will  disappear!” 

Yes,  but  all  these  we  know  are  only  various  manifesta- 
tions of  truth,  and  the  change  that  is  before  us  is  only  to 
be  made  for  the  sake  of  a closer  attainment  and  realization 
of  truth.  How  then  can  the  manifestations  of  truth  disap- 
pear through  our  realizing  it?  These  manifestations  will 
be  different,  higher,  better,  but  they  will  not  cease  to  be. 
Only  what  is  false  in  them  will  be  destroyed;  all  the  truth 
there  was  in  them  will  only  be  stronger  and  more  flour- 
ishing. 


/S  WITHIN  YOU. 


3*^  I 

Take  thought,  oh,  men,  and  have  faith  in  the  Gospel,  in 
whose  teaching  is  your  happiness.  If  you  do  not  take 
thought,  you  will  perish  just  as  the  men  perished,  slain  by 
Pilate,  or  crushed  by  the  tower  of  Siloam ; as  millions  of 
men  have  perished,  slayers  and  slain,  executing  and  exe- 
cuted, torturers  and  tortured  alike,  and  as  the  man  foolishly 
perished,  who  filled  his  granaries  full  and  made  ready  for  a 
long  life  and  died  the  very  night  that  he  planned  to  begin 
his  life.  Take  thought  and  have  faith  in  the  Gospel,  Christ 
said  eighteen  hundred  years  ago,  and  he  says  it  with  even 
greater  force  now  that  the  calamities  foretold  by  him  have 
come  to  pass,  and  the  senselessness  of  our  life  has  reached 
the  furthest  point  of  suffering  and  madness. 

Nowadays,  after  so  many  centuries  of  fruitless  efforts  to 
make  our  life  secure  by  the  pagan  organization  of  life,  it 
must  be  evident  to  everyone  that  all  efforts  in  that  direction 
only  introduce  fresh  dangers  into  personal  and  social  life, 
and  do  not  render  it  more  secure  in  any  way. 

Whatever  names  we  dignify  ourselves  wdth,  whatever  uni- 
forms we  wear,  whatever  priests  we  anoint  ourselves 
before,  however  many  millions  we  possess,  however  many 
guards  are  stationed  along  our  road,  however  many  police- 
men guard  our  wealth,  however  many  so-called  criminals, 
revolutionists,  and  anarchists  we  punish,  whatever  exploits 
we  have  performed,  whatever  states  we  may  have  founded, 
fortresses  and  towers  we  may  have  erected — from  Babel  to 
the  Eiffel  Tower — there  are  two  inevitable  conditions  of 
life,  confronting  all  of  us,  w-hich  destroy  its  whole  meaning; 
(i)  death,  which  may  at  any  moment  pounce  upon  each  of 
us ; and  (2)  the  transitoriness  of  all  our  works,  which  so  soon 
pass  away  and  leave  no  trace.  Whatever  we  may  do — 
found  companies,  build  palaces  and  monuments,  write  songs 
and  poems — it  is  all  not  for  long  time.  Soon  it  passes 
away,  leaving  no  trace.  And  therefore,  however  we  may 
conceal  it  from  ourselves,  we  cannot  help  seeing  that  the 


362 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


significance  of  our  life  cannot  lie  in  our  personal  fleshly 
existence,  the  prey  of  incurable  suffering  and  inevitable 
death,  nor  in  any  social  institution  or  organization.  Who- 
ever you  may  be  who  are  reading  these  lines,  think  of  your 
position  and  of  your  duties — not  of  your  position  as  land- 
owner,  merchant,  judge,  emperor,  president,  minister, 
priest,  soldier,  which  has  been  temporarily  allotted  you  by 
men,  and  not  of  the  imaginary  duties  laid  on  you  by  those 
positions,  but  of  your  real  positions  in  eternity  as  a creature 
who  at  the  will  of  Someone  has  been  called  out  of  uncon- 
sciousness after  an  eternity  of  non-existence  to  which  you 
may  return  at  any  moment  at  his  will.  Think  of  your 
duties — not  your  supposed  duties  as  a landowner  to  your 
estate,  as  a merchant  to  your  business,  as  emperor,  minis- 
ter, or  official  to  the  state,  but  of  your  real  duties,  the 
duties  that  follow  from  your  real  position  as  a being  called 
into  life  and  endowed  with  reason  and  love. 

Are  you  doing  what  he  demands  of  you  who  has  sent  you 
into  the  world,  and  to  whom  you  will  soon  return?  Are 
you  doing  what  he  wills?  Are  you  doing  his  will,  when  as 
landowner  or  manufacturer  you  rob  the  poor  of  the  fruits  of 
their  toil,  basing  your  life  on  this  plunder  of  the  workers, 
or  when,  as  judge  or  governor,  you  ill  treat  men,  sentence 
them  to  execution,  or  when  as  soldiers  you  prepare  for  war, 
kill  and  plunder? 

You  will  say  that  the  world  is  so  made  that  this  is  inevi- 
table, and  that  you  do  not  do  this  of  your  own  free  will,  but 
because  you  are  forced  to  do  so.  But  can  it  be  that  you 
have  such  a strong  aversion  to  men’s  sufferings,  ill  treat- 
ment, and  murder,  that  you  have  such  an  intense  need  of 
love  and  co-operation  with  your  fellows  that  you  see  clearly 
that  only  by  the  recognition  of  the  equality  of  all,  and  by 
mutual  services,  can  the  greatest  possible  happiness  be  real- 
ized,; that  your  head  and  your  heart,  the  faith  you  profess, 
and  even  science  itself  tell  you  the  same  thing,  and  yet  that 


/S  WITHIN  you:' 


363 


in  spite  of  it  all  you  can  be  forced  by  some  confused  and 
complicated  reasoning  to  act  in  direct  opposition  to  all  this; 
that  as  landowner  or  capitalist  you  are  bound  to  base  your 
whole  life  on  the  oppression  of  the  people ; that  as  emperor 
or  president  you  are  to  command  armies,  that  is,  to  be  the 
head  and  commander  of  murderers ; or  that  as  government 
official  you  are  forced  to  take  from  the  poor  their  last  pence 
for  rich  men  to  profit  and  share  them  among  themselves ; or 
that  as  judge  or  juryman  you  could  be  forced  to  sentence 
erring  men  to  ill  treatment  and  death  because  the  truth  was 
not  revealed  to  them,  or  above  all,  for  that  is  the  basis  of 
all  the  evil,  that  you  could  be  forced  to  become  a soldier, 
and  renouncing  your  free  will  and  your  human  sentiments, 
could  undertake  to  kill  anyone  at  the  command  of  other 
men? 

It  cannot  be. 

Even  if  you  are  told  that  all  this  is  necessary  for  the 
maintenance  of  the  existing  order  of  things,  and  that  this 
social  order  with  its  pauperism,  famines,  prisons,  gallows, 
armies,  and  wars  is  necessary  to  society;  that  still  greater 
disasters  would  ensue  if  this  organization  were  destroyed ; 
all  that  is  said  only  by  those  who  profit  by  this  organiza- 
tion, while  those  who  suffer  from  it — and  they  are  ten  times 
as  numerous — think  and  say  quite  the  contrary.  And  at 
the  bottom  of  your  heart  you  know  yourself  that  it  is  not 
true,  that  the  existing  oragnization  has  outlived  its  time, 
and  must  inevitably  be  reconstructed  on  new  principles, 
and  that  consequently  there  is  no  obligation  upon  you  to 
sacrifice  your  sentiments  of  humanity  to  support  it. 

Above  all,  even  if  you  allow  that  this  organization  is 
necessary,  why  do  you  believe  it  to  be  your  duty  to  maintain 
it  at  the  cost  of  your  best  feelings?  Who  has  made  you  the 
nurse  in  charge  of  this  sick  and  moribund  organization? 
Not  society  nor  the  state  nor  anyone;  no  one  has  asked 
you  to  undertake  this;  you  who  fill  your  position  of  land- 


3*54 


" THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


owner,  merchant,  tzar,  priest,  or  soldier  know  very  well 
that  you  occupy  that  position  by  no  means  with  the  unselfish 
aim  of  maintaining  the  organization  of  life  necessary  to 
men’s  happiness,  but  simply  in  your  own  interests,  to  satisfy 
your  own  covetousness  or  vanity  or  ambition  or  indolence 
or  cowardice.  If  you  did  not  desire  that  position,  you 
would  not  be  doing  your  utmost  to  retain  it.  Try  the  ex- 
periment of  ceasing  to  commit  the  cruel,  treacherous,  and 
base  actions  that  you  are  constantly  committing  in  order  to 
retain  your  position,  and  you  will  lose  it  at  once.  Try  the 
simple  experiment,  as  a government  official,  of  giving  up 
lying,  and  refusing  to  take  a part  in  executions  and  acts  of 
violence;  as  a priest,  of  giving  up  deception;  as  a soldier, 
of  giving  up  murder;  as  landowner  or  manufacturer,  of  giv- 
ing up  defending  your  property  by  fraud  and  force;  and  you 
will  at  once  lose  the  position  which  you  pretend  is  forced 
upon  you,  and  which  seems  burdensome  to  you. 

A man  cannot  be  placed  against  his  will  in  a situation 
opposed  to  his  conscience. 

If  you  find  yourself  in  such  a position  it  is  not  because  it 
is  necessary  to  anyone  whatever,  but  simply  because  you 
wish  it.  And  therefore  knowing  that  your  position  is  re- 
pugnant to  your  heart  and  your  head,  and  to  your  faith,  and 
even  to  the  science  in  which  you  believe,  you  cannot  help 
reflecting  upon  the  question  whether  in  retaining  it,  and 
above  all  trying  to  justify  it,  you  are  doing  what  you  ought 
to  do. 

You  might  risk  making  a mistake  if  you  had  time  to  see 
and  retrieve  your  fault,  and  if  you  ran  the  risk  for  some- 
thing of  some  value.  But  when  you  know  beyond  all  doubt 
that  you  may  disappear  any  minute,  without  the  least  possi- 
bility either  for  yourself  or  those  you  draw  after  you  into 
your  error,  of  retrieving  the  mistake,  when  you  know  that 
whatever  you  may  do  in  the  external  organization  of  life  it 
v/ill  all  disappear  as  quickly  and  surely  as  you  will  yourself. 


rs  WITHIN  YOU. 


365 


and  will  leave  no  trace  behind,  it  is  clear  that  you  have  no 
reasonable  ground  for  running  the  risk  of  such  a fearful 
mistake. 

It  would  be  perfectly  simple  and  clear  if  you  did  not  by 
your  hypocrisy  disguise  the  truth  which  has  so  unmistakably 
been  revealed  to  us. 

Share  all  that  you  have  with  others,  do  not  heap  up 
riches,  do  not  steal,  do  not  cause  suffering,  do  not  kill,  dp 
not  unto  others  what  you  would  not  they  should  do  unto 
you,  all  that  has  been  said  not  eighteen  hundred,  but  five 
thousand  years  ago,  and  there  could  be  no  doubt  of  the  truth 
of  this  law  if  it  were  not  for  hypocrisy.  Except  for  hypoc- 
risy men  could  not  have  failed,  if  not  to  put  the  law  in  prac- 
tice, at  least  to  recognize  it,  and  admit  that  it  is  wrong  not 
to  put  it  in  practice. 

But  you  will  say  that  there  is  the  public  good  to  be  con- 
sidered, and  that  on  that  account  one  must  not  and  ought 
not  to  conform  to  these  principles;  for  the  public  good  one 
may  commit  acts  of  violence  and  murder.  It  is  better  for 
one  man  to  die  than  that  the  whole  people  perish,  you  will 
say  like  Caiaphas,  and  you  sign  the  sentence  of  death  of 
one  man,  of  a second,  and  a third;  you  load  your  gun 
against  this  man  who  is  to  perish  for  the  public  good,  you 
imprison  him,  you  take  his  possessions.  You  say  that  you 
commit  these  acts  of  cruelty  because  you  are  a part  of  the 
society  and  of  the  state;  that  it  is  your  duty  to  serve  them, 
and  as  landowner,  judge,  emperor,  or  soldier  to  conform  to 
their  laws.  But  besides  belonging  to  the  state  and  having 
duties  created  by  that  position,  you  belong  also  to  eternity 
and  to  God,  who  also  lays  duties  upon  you.  And  just  as 
your  duties  to  your  family  and  to  society  are  subordinate  to 
your  superior  duties  to  the  state,  in  the  same  way  the  latter 
must  necessarily  be  subordinated  to  the  duties  dictated  to 
you  by  the  eternal  life  and  by  God.  And  just  as  it  would 
be  senseless  to  pull  up  the  telegraph  posts  for  fuel  for  a 


366 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


family  or  society  and  thus  to  increase  its  welfare  at  the 
expense  of  public  interests,  in  the  same  way  it  is  senseless 
to  do  violence,  to  execute,  and  to  murder  to  increase  the 
welfare  of  the  nation,  because  that  is  at  the  expense  of  the 
interests  of  humanity. 

Your  duties  as  a citizen  cannot  but  be  subordinated  to 
the  superior  obligations  of  the  eternal  life  of  God,  and  can- 
not be  in  opposition  to  them.  As  Christ’s  disciples  said 
eighteen  centuries  ago;  “Whether  it  be  right  in  the  sight  of 
God  to  hearken  unto  you  more  than  unto  God,  judge  ye’’ 
(Acts  iv.  19);  and,  “We  ought  to  obey  God  rather  than 
men’’  (Acts  v.  29). 

It  is  asserted  that,  in  order  that  the  unstable  order  of 
things,  established  in  one  corner  of  the  world  for  a few  men, 
may  not  be  destroyed,  you  ought  to  commit  acts  of  violence 
which  destroy  the  eternal  and  immutable  order  established 
by  God  and  by  reason.  Can  that  possibly  be? 

And  therefore  you  cannot  but  reflect  on  your  position  as 
landowner,  manufacturer,  judge,  emperor,  president,  minis- 
ter, priest,  and  soldier,  which  is  bound  up  with  violence, 
deception,  and  murder,  and  recognize  its  unlawfulness. 

I do  not  say  that  if  you  are  a landowner  you  are  bound 
to  give  up  your  lands  immediately  to  the  poor;  if  a capital- 
ist or  manufacturer,  your  money  to  your  workpeople;  or 
that  if  you  are  Tzar,  minister,  official,  judge,  or  general, 
you  are  bound  to  renounce  immediately  the  advantages  of 
your  position ; or  if  a soldier,  on  whom  all  the  system  of 
violence  is  based,  to  refuse  immediately  to  obey  in  spite  of 
all  the  dangers  of  insubordination. 

If  you  do  so,  you  will  be  doing  the  best  thing  possible. 
But  it  may  happen,  and  it  is  most  likely,  that  you  will  not 
have  the  strength  to  do  so.  You  have  relations,  a family, 
subordinates  and  superiors;  you  are  under  an  influence  so 
powerful  that  you  cannot  shake  it  off;  but  you  can  always 
recognize  the  truth  and  refuse  to  tell  a lie  about  it.  You 


/S  WITHIN-  YOU" 


3<^7 

need  not  declare  that  you  are  remaining  a landowner,  manu- 
facturer, merchant,  artist,  or  writer  because  it  is  useful  to 
mankind;  that  you  are  governor,  prosecutor,  or  tzar,  not 
because  it  is  agreeable  to  you,  because  you  are  used  to  it, 
but  for  the  public  good ; that  you  continue  to  be  a soldier, 
not  from  fear  of  punishment,  but  because  you  consider  the 
army  necessary  to  society.  You  can  always  avoid  lying  in 
this  way  to  yourself  and  to  others,  and  you  ought  to  do  so; 
because  the  one  aim  of  your  life  ought  to  be  to  purify  your- 
self from  falsehood  and  to  confess  the  truth.  And  you 
need  only  do  that  and  your  situation  will  change  directly  of 
itself. 

There  is  one  thing,  and  only  one  thing,  in  which  it  is 
granted  to  you  to  be  free  in  life,  all  else  being  beyond  your 
power:  that  is  to  recognize  and  profess  the  truth. 

And  yet  simply  from  the  fact  that  other  men  as  misguided 
and  as  pitiful  creatures  as  yourself  have  made  you  soldier, 
tzar,  landowner,  capitalist,  priest,  or  general,  you  under- 
take to  commit  acts  of  violence  obviously  opposed  to  your 
reason  and  your  heart,  to  base  your  existence  on  the  misfor- 
tunes of  others,  and  above  all,  instead  of  filling  the  one 
duty  of  your  life,  recognizing  and  professing  the  truth,  you 
feign  not  to  recognize  it  and  disguise  it  from  yourself  and 
others. 

And  what  are  the  conditions  in  which  you  are  doing  this? 
You  who  may  die  any  instant,  you  sign  sentences  of  death, 
you  declare  war,  you  take  part  in  it,  you  judge,  you  punish, 
you  plunder  the  working  people,  you  live  luxuriously  in  the 
midst  of  the  poor,  and  teach  weak  men  who  have  confidence 
in  you  that  this  must  be  so,  that  the  duty  of  men  is  to  do 
this,  and  yet  it  may  happen  at  the  moment  when  you  are 
acting  thus  that  a bacterium  or  a bull  may  attack  you  and 
you  will  fall  and  die,  losing  forever  the  chance  of  repairing 
the  harm  you  have  done  to  others,  and  above  all  to  yourself, 
in  uselessly  wasting  a life  which  has  been  given  you  only 


368  “ the  kingdom  of  god  is  within  you:* 

once  in  eternity,  without  having  accomplished  the  only 
thing  you  ought  to  have  done. 

However  commonplace  and  out  of  date  it  may  seem  to 
us,  however  confused  we  may  be  by  hypocrisy  and  by  the 
hypnotic  suggestion  which  results  from  it,  nothing  can 
destroy  the  certainty  of  this  simple  and  clearly  defined  truth. 
No  external  conditions  can  guarantee  our  life,  which  is 
attended  with  inevitable  sufferings  and  infallibly  terminated 
by  death,  and  which  consequently  can  have  no  significance 
except  in  the  constant  accomplishment  of  what  is  demanded 
by  the  Power  which  has  placed  us  in  life  with  a sole  certain 
guide — the  rational  conscience. 

That  is  why  that  Power  cannot  require  of  us  what  is  irra- 
tional and  impossible:  the  organization  of  our  temporary 
external  life,  the  life  of  society  or  of  the  state.  That  Power 
demands  of  us  only  what  is  reasonable,  certain,  and  possi- 
ble: to  serve  the  kingdom  of  God,  that  is,  to  contribute  to 
the  establishment  of  the  greatest  possible  union  between  all 
living  beings — a union  possible  only  in  the  truth;  and  to 
recognize  and  to  profess  the  revealed  truth,  which  is  always 
in  our  power. 

“But  seek  ye  first  the  kindgom  of  God,  and  his  righteous- 
ness, and  all  these  things  shall  be  added  unto  you.”  (Matt. 

vi-  33  ) 

The  sole  meaning  of  life  is  to  serve  humanity  by  con- 
tributing to  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  which 
can  only  be  done  by  the  recognition  and  profession  of  the 
truth  by  every  man. 

“The  kingdom  of  God  cometh  not  with  outward  show; 
neither  shall  they  say,  Lo  here!  or,  Lo  there!  for  behold,  the 
kingdom  of  God  is  within  you.”  (Luke  xvii.  20,  21.) 


THE  END. 


“A  DANGEROUS  AND  DIFFICULT  SUBJECT  FOR  A NOVEL.” 

— The  Avt^rican  Woma^t's  Jllustrated  World. 


THE  HEAVENLY  TWINS. 

By  SARAH  GRAND. 

In  one  large  i2mo  volume  of  nearly  700  pages.  Extra  cloth, 
laid  paper.  Price  $1.00. 


“ There  is  much  powerful  and  beautiful  writing  in  this  remarkable 
and  not-to-be-forgotten  book.” — The  World. 

“ The  adventures  of  Diavolo  and  Angelica — the  ‘ Heavenly  Twins’ 
— are  delightfully  funny.  No  more  original  children  were  ever  put 
in  a book.” — The  Academy. 

“ The  moral  which  the  author  undertakes  to  enforce  is  that  the 
sacrifice  of  pure  women  in  marriage  to  men  of  vicious  lives  is  not 
only  a crime  against  the  individual,  but  against  society  itself.” — 
Boston  Beacon. 

“ The  work  swarms  with  wise  sayings  and  noble  counsels.” — 
M ethodist  2 im  :s. 

“ This  book  is  one  full  of  talent,  and  not  of  talent  misapplied,  for 
‘ The  Heavenly  Twins’  is  strong  enough  to  assert  itself  and  to  point 
amoral.” — 2V.  Y.  Times. 

“ Whether  or  not  a pure  woman  marrying  has  a right  to  equal 
purity  in  the  man  she  marries — this  is  the  problem  attempted  by 
Sarah  Grand  in  her  heroine’s  behalf  in  ‘ The  Heavenly  Twins.’  It 
is  an  earnest  book,  showing  its  author’s  cultured  mind  on  every 
page.” — Table  Talk. 

“ A very  curious  and  interesting  novel.  . . The  burden  of  the 
author’s  song  is  the  emancipation  of  woman  and  the  establishment 
of  a stricter  moral  standard  for  man.  From  one  end  to  the  other 
it  is  interesting,  in  spots  intensely  and  absorbingly  so.” — Kate  Field's 
Washington. 

THE  CASSELL  PUBLISHING  CO., 

31  East  17TH  St.  (Union  Square),  New  York. 


THE  EMIGRANT  SHIP. 

By  W.  CLARK  RUSSELL, 

Author  of'‘'‘Lisiy  ye  Landsmen  / ” **'The  Romance  of  a.  Transport'^ 
'''‘The  Wreck  of  the  Grosvenor^''  etc.,,  etc. 

One  Volume.  12mo.  Cloth.  51  *00. 


“ The  story  is  told  with  excellent  directness,  and  the  atmosphere  of  life  aboard 
an  emigrant  ship  is  admirably  conveyed  to  the  reader.  There  is  no  sea  technicality 
to  speak  of,  the  whole  interest  of  the  story  being  concentrated  in  the  hero’s  plan 
to  develop  a crew  among  his  women  passengers.  On  the  whole,  ‘ The  Emigrant 
Ship’  is  one  of  the  most  readable  of  Mr.  Russell’s  charming  tales.” — New  York 
Times. 

“ For  a very  fine  tonic  in  the  way  of  fiction  commend  us  always  to  Mr.  Clark 
Russell.  The  sea  never  fails  to  lash  itself  in  a most  beautiful  manner  when  he  is 
about.  He  has,  perhaps,  as  vigorous  a vocabulary  as  anybody  now  going.  He 
can  talk  in  strong  and  splendid  phrase  too  of  more  things  than  the  sea.”— 

York  Sun. 

“ On  the  whole,  the  best  which  Mr.  Russell  has  produced.  It  is  beautifully 
bound  and  makes  a marine  library  without  it  seem  poverty-stricken.” — Boston 
Daily  Traveller. 

” Is  readable  from  beginning  to  end.  No  better  sea  story  has  been  written.” — 
Philadelphia  Bulletin. 

The  keen  salt  breath  of  the  sea  flows  through  all  his  descriptions,  and  he 
makes  his  readers  feel  its  inspiration  as  he  feels  it  himself.  No  one  knows  better 
the  methods  of  ocean  life,  and  no  one  handles  its  fascination  more  subtly  or  skill- 
fully, while  for  the  reader  who  loves  a story  for  the  story’s  sake  this  tale  is  worth 
half  a dozen  of  modern  * society  ’ novels.” — New  York  Commercial  Advertiser. 

“Will  appeal  to  all  such  as  love  the  sea  and  the  free  and  breezy  stories  of  it 
which  are  characteristic  of  this  keen  student  and  ardent  lover  of  its  moods  and 
vagaries.” — New  York  Mail  a7id  Express. 

“ There  is  a genuine  sea  flavor  to  Clark  Russell’s  stories,  a sally  taste,  a smell  of 
ropes  and  rigging,  and  the  bracing  freshness  of  the  ocean  air.  There  is  also  the 
freedom  of  the  broad  seas,  but  with  all  this  there  is  neither  the  vulgarity  nor  the 
devilishness  which  so  many  nautical  writers  seem  to  think  it  necessary  to  affect. 
His  sea  tales  are  original  to  a striking  degree,  they  are  never  dull,  and  withal  they 
are  clean’  and  wholesome.  They  make  good  reading  for  old  boys  as  well  as 
young. ’ ’ — Balti more  Telegra m . 

“ The  sea  stories  of  W.  Clark  Russell  have  delighted  readers  for  a goodly  num- 
ber of  years,  and  a new  story  by  the  author  of  ‘ The  Wreck  of  the  Grosvenor’  is 
always  hailed  with  delight.  . . That  the  story  is  of  thrilling  interest  and  novelty 
goes  without  saying.” — Boston  Journal. 

“ It  is  bright,  interesting,  strong.  . . There  is  more  of  human  nature  in  it  than 
in  any  of  his  previous  books.” — New  York  World. 

“ Where  is  the  boy,  old  or  young,  with  a heart  in  him  who  doesn't  know  how 
incomparably  well  he  writes  his  amazing  adventures  on  the  high  seas?  Here  we 
have  a story  which  could  only  by  any  possible  chance  proceed  from  the  pen  of 
Mr.  Russell.” — Philadelphia  Press. 

“ W.  Clark  Russell  stands  without  a peer  as  a master  in  telling  marine  stories. 
He  is  thoroughly  at  home  at  sea,  and  his  new  novel,  * The  Emigrant  Ship,’  is  one 
of  his  best.  The  plot  is  fresh  and  the  development  is  most  skillful.” — Boston 
Daily  Advertiser.  


THE  CASSELL  PUBLISHING  CO., 

31  East  17TH  St.  (Union  Square),  New  York. 

104 


“ Racy  and  brilliant.” — London Athenmmn 


“I  FORBID  THE  BANNS!” 

TEE  STORY  OF  A COMEDY  WHICH  WAS  PLAYED  SEEIODSIY. 

BY 

FRANK  FRANKFORT  MOORb. 


I Vol.,  i2mo,  Cloth,  $1.00. 


“ Needs  no  recommendation  to  make  it  popular." — Manchester  Chron- 
icle. 

“ Crisp  and  epigrammatic.” — San  Francisco  Argonaut. 

“A  book  which  abounds  in  good  things.” — London  Daily  Chronicle. 

“ Keen  satire,  genuine  humor,  literary  ability.” — Philadelphia  Item. 

“ There  can  be  but  one  verdict,  and  that  is  distinct  success.” — London 
Daily  Telegraph. 

“ A capital  and  thoroughly  original  story.” — Boston  Titnes. 

“ No  novel  more  original,  suggestive,  and  entrancing  is  likely  to 
‘appear  for  a long  time.” — Liverpool  Mercury. 

“ There  isn’t  a dull  page  in  the  book.” — New  York  Recorder. 

“ The  subject  is  treated  in  a masterly  manner.” — London  Literary 
World. 

” Exceedingly  attractive.” — Boston  Daily  Advertiser. 


FOR  SALE  BY  ALL  BOOKSELLERS. 


NEW  YORK 

THE  CASSELL  PUBLISHING  CO. 

31  East  17TH  St.  (Union  Square) 

98 


Mrs.  Alexander’s  Latest  Novel. 


The  Snare  of  the  Fowler. 

BY  MRS.  ALEXANDER. 

Author  of  “The  Wooing  O’t,"  “Which  Shall  it  Be?" 

ETC.,  ETC. 


X Vol.,  I2m0,  Extra  Cloth,  $i.oo  ; Paper,  Cassell’s  Sunshine  Series, 
50  cents. 


“ Few  novelists  of  this  century  have  shown  themselves  possessors 
of  a more  prolific  pen  than  has  Mrs.  Alexander,  nor  have  any  became 
more  popular  in  our  homes.  . . Her  latest,  ‘ The  Snare  of  the 
Fowler,’  is  written  with  her  usual  vivacity  and  is  admirably  sus* 
tained . ” — Baltimore  A merican. 

“ Full  of  dramatic  interest.’’ — Lowell  Times. 

“Well  written,  extremely  well  written.’’ — Chicago  Times. 

“The  different  characters  are  outlined  with  that  art  of  brilliant  con- 
trasts which  the  author  employs  with  unfailing  felicity.” — Boston 
Beacon. 

“Will  meet  with  warm  welcome.” — Cedar  Rapids  Gazette. 

“ Certainly  one  of  her  best;  and  perhaps  nothing  that  she  has  pub- 
lished, since  ‘ The  Wooing  O’t  ’ gave  her  so  wide  fame  when  brought 
out  twenty  years  ago,  has  so  much  merit.” — Boston  Daily  Traveller. 

“ Healthfully  pure  and  moral  . . . and  of  unflagging  interest.” — 
Philadelphia  Evenuig  Bulletin. 

“ Mrs.  Alexander  is  a dexterous  handler  of  plots.” — Boston  Courier. 

“ Those  who  have  read  her  previous  works  will  not  be  disappointed 
in  the  present  one.” — Philadelphia  Item. 

“ Pleasing  from  beginning  to  end.” — Boston  Times. 


Ask  your  Bookseller  to  show  you  a copy. 


NEW  YORK 

THE  CASSELL  PUBLISHING  CO. 

31  East  lyxH  St.  (Union  Square) 

8J 


1 

Date  Due 

i 

0 25  ’48 

OC 1 9 ’4 

j 

9086  1 

WlRl 

aJ}'\3’51 

m7l^'32 

»!*• 

DE  3 52^ 

MR  1 b ’53 

i9<-.  t^m 

faculty 

_'K.- 

MY  2 8 ’54 

r - '■ 

. 

P' 

\ 

A - -‘J 

a 

3Rd 

JX1959  .T65 

“The  kingdom  of  God  is  within  you," 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1 

1 1012  ( 

00025 

9921 

